On 1/3/2012 5:37 AM, notbob wrote:
On 2012-01-03, wrote:

lot of TVs, but now Costco is the place to buy electronics with their
free extended warranty and low prices.

Actually, Costco has severely amended their warranty/return policy on
electronics like computers and tv's, as customers were gaming the
system to get free new models every few months.

They amended the return policy but not the warranty. You still get a two
year warranty on those items.

On 12/28/2011 8:27 AM, wrote:
On Dec 28, 10:54 am, "Stormin Mormon"
I find that Kmart and Target are both retail stores, which is reasonable.
Walmart, tends to be light weight, less quality items for lower prices.

I've been in Kmart, the last few months. I was looking for a fairly
specialized item. Found one close enough in Target, actually. One friend of
mine loves the blue jeans that Kmart sells.

Wow, I've never found ANYTHING to buy in a Target. I only go in there
if I'm in too good of a mood and need to be disappointed.

Target is trying to become a boutique like store selling high margin
clothing, shoes, sundries and linens. They have no interest in hardware,
auto parts, outdoor items, etc. Say what you want about Walmart, but you
can still buy a spool of thread, motor oil, camping stuff, pet supplies,
etc. at Walmart.

On 2012-01-04, SMS wrote:
I can imagine the disappointment in the White House over the implosion
of Rick Perry, Michelle Bachman, and Newt Gingrich. They would have been
easy to defeat. Romney will be tough to beat since he won't scare away
all the independents unless he pulls a McCain and chooses a ridiculous
running mate.

I thought that the Republican candidate has not been selected yet?

On 1/3/2012 5:43 PM, notbob wrote:
On 2012-01-03, The Daring wrote:

all their hair out while making it all work. Darn it, Linux will wind
up in the hands of the dumb masses. o_O

Pretty much already there. IPhones are BSD based and the rest are
Linux based (android) and everyone is happy as a clam to be bugged,
tracked, and charged for the privilege. The whole free open source
software (FOSS, free as in freedom) movement has been steamrollered by
corporate Amerika, which is more than happy to do so, specially when
aided by the millions of sheep who stand in line begging to be
fleeced. I mean, finally, FOSS provides the ppl the way to throw off
their shackles and the ppl respond with, "We prefer shackles!". I
find it hilarious.

Fortunately, groups like Anonymous are more than happy to take the
tools of oppression and turn them back on their creators. I'm no
hacker or code boy, but I do my part to not support those who would
relieve us of what few liberties we have remaining. I'm currently
trying to learn basic C programming, more out of respect for
Unix/Linux pioneers than any reason to use it. Hell! I don't really
even like computer programming, but the challenge keeps this ol'
geezer brain from fossilizing too quickly.

nb


The one thing I seem to remember that really helped get the personal
computer launched was IBM letting everyone use their PC architecture.
The same thing seems to be going on with Linux where a lot of companies
are building products and software packages based on it. ^_^

TDD

Steve B wrote:

????Pick up a decent trackball and you wont go back
???
???I hate 'em. My fingers won't take a trackball; very bad ergonomics.

I bought a trackball after major right shoulder surgery. I could not hold
my arm up to work a mouse, and a track just sat cupped in my left hand,
roller ball operated by the right. I like it because I can just slap it
when I want the cursor to move a long ways, it doesn't move much on my desk
or take up as much space as a pad, and I don't have to move my arm much, but
rather rest it on the desk. Whatever works for you.


Have you ever tried a Griffin Powermate?


--
You can't have a sense of humor, if you have no sense.

Spehro Pefhany wrote:

Remember really early mice actually had microswitches in there (with ?
1 million operations mechanical life), not those sub-penny tact
switches?


I've replaced bad switches in those, too but it's been at leat 15
years since I saw one with real 'Microswitch' switches. I may still
have a mouse for a Commodore 64 that used them but I haven't been able
to work in my big shop for about seven years. I have been cleaning out
the small one, and pricing the materials for a new roof. It's 18' *
28'. The big shop is 30' * 40'.


--
You can't have a sense of humor, if you have no sense.

On 2012-01-04, Michael A. Terrell wrote:

years since I saw one with real 'Microswitch' switches.

I don't know if they are real microswitches, but the best mouse I ever
found was the early Logitech Mouseman, the asymetric 3 button ones. I
was a CAD designer and had one in my hand for 8-10 hrs day and they
didn't give me grief. The lightest button switches I've ever used. I
still have half a dozen.

I tried several trackballs, but they all started paining me after
awhile. I now also have a Microsoft optical trackball with the
jawbreaker sized ball on the thumb side of the mouse. Never had to
spend hours a day with it, but it might have been ergonomically OK
back when I worked. Also very light buttons.

nb


--
vi --the root of evil

On Tue, 03 Jan 2012 10:18:40 -0600, The Daring Dufas
wrote:

On 1/3/2012 7:58 AM, notbob wrote:
On 2012-01-03, The Daring wrote:

I'm kinda fond of PC-BSD myself.

I use OpenBSD when I use unix. The BSDs are all good.

or not, most folks are using Microsoft products and I have to stay
up on what's going on with them and be familiar with them so I can
service their systems. I took a copy of Puppy Linux with me today when
I went to the young lady's home to fix her computer, I often use a live
Linux CD to test a system to make sure the hardware is OK before diving
into the addled software installed on the hard drive. ^_^

If ppl want to stick with Windows or Apple, fine by me. I'm no linux
evangelist. I jes think it the height of absurdity to use a computer
platform where a commercial entity, be it M$ or Apple, exerts more
control over the computer and its use than the owner. Even more
astonishing is ppl actually paying a corporation for the privilege of
being dictated to. "Here's my $$$. Now, tell me what I can or can't
do"

Un-freakin-believable!!

nb


Gunner uses Xandros but it's payware Linux and I suppose that's OK if
you want a software distribution where someone else has already pulled
all their hair out while making it all work. Darn it, Linux will wind
up in the hands of the dumb masses. o_O

TDD

Actually..I use 4.6 Xandros..which was free.

Gunner

One could not be a successful Leftwinger without realizing that,
in contrast to the popular conception supported by newspapers
and mothers of Leftwingers, a goodly number of Leftwingers are
not only narrow-minded and dull, but also just stupid.
Gunner Asch

On 1/3/2012 10:50 PM, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Tue, 03 Jan 2012 10:18:40 -0600, The Daring Dufas
wrote:

On 1/3/2012 7:58 AM, notbob wrote:
On 2012-01-03, The Daring wrote:

I'm kinda fond of PC-BSD myself.

I use OpenBSD when I use unix. The BSDs are all good.

or not, most folks are using Microsoft products and I have to stay
up on what's going on with them and be familiar with them so I can
service their systems. I took a copy of Puppy Linux with me today when
I went to the young lady's home to fix her computer, I often use a live
Linux CD to test a system to make sure the hardware is OK before diving
into the addled software installed on the hard drive. ^_^

If ppl want to stick with Windows or Apple, fine by me. I'm no linux
evangelist. I jes think it the height of absurdity to use a computer
platform where a commercial entity, be it M$ or Apple, exerts more
control over the computer and its use than the owner. Even more
astonishing is ppl actually paying a corporation for the privilege of
being dictated to. "Here's my $$$. Now, tell me what I can or can't
do"

Un-freakin-believable!!

nb


Gunner uses Xandros but it's payware Linux and I suppose that's OK if
you want a software distribution where someone else has already pulled
all their hair out while making it all work. Darn it, Linux will wind
up in the hands of the dumb masses. o_O

TDD

Actually..I use 4.6 Xandros..which was free.

Gunner

One could not be a successful Leftwinger without realizing that,
in contrast to the popular conception supported by newspapers
and mothers of Leftwingers, a goodly number of Leftwingers are
not only narrow-minded and dull, but also just stupid.
Gunner Asch

Well heck, my mistake, I just looked it up and found it was payware and
didn't look for a free distribution. o_O

TDD

On 2012-01-04, The Daring Dufas wrote:

Well heck, my mistake, I just looked it up and found it was payware and
didn't look for a free distribution. o_O

A look at wiki reveals it includes Crossover Office and some sorta
download support. Why anyone would pay for these small features, I
can't say, but I have nothing against Linux for $$$. I almost
payed for a commercial Linux application, once, and may still do so.
Bottom line, no one is extorting buyers or dictating terms. It's
still choice. Much different than what RMS calls "jail made cool", as
he refers to the Apple Empire.

http://www.osnews.com/story/25469/Ri...ight_All_Along

nb

--
vi --the root of evil

On 1/4/2012 7:12 AM, notbob wrote:
On 2012-01-04, The Daring wrote:

Well heck, my mistake, I just looked it up and found it was payware and
didn't look for a free distribution. o_O

A look at wiki reveals it includes Crossover Office and some sorta
download support. Why anyone would pay for these small features, I
can't say, but I have nothing against Linux for $$$. I almost
payed for a commercial Linux application, once, and may still do so.
Bottom line, no one is extorting buyers or dictating terms. It's
still choice. Much different than what RMS calls "jail made cool", as
he refers to the Apple Empire.

http://www.osnews.com/story/25469/Ri...ight_All_Along

nb


I really don't have a problem with someone using Linux as a base for a
commercial package because they've gone to the trouble to do all the
work making everything operate and be updated easily. The core code and
software will always be available for experimenters to fiddle with and
build their own distributions. ^_^

TDD

On 3 Jan 2012 05:07:44 GMT, notbob wrote:

On 2012-01-03, zzzzzzzzzz wrote:

Its hardware support is severely lacking, making it next to useless as a
personal system.

Nonsense. I haven't had a problem with hardware compatability for
years. Last time I bought a new Brother laser printer, it set up with
CUPS (linux) in about 30 secs, about 5X faster than getting it working
on a Windows box. Even my scanner is no problem. Some experts claim
Linux now has better hardware support than Windows 7. The myth that
linux has poor hardware support is just that. A long dead myth, at
that.

My tower system won't boot to Linux. Actually, the display won't configure
properly and it's rather hard to change settings blind. This isn't unusual.

My Internet radio supports only Windows (several flavors back to Win2K) and
OS/X. No Linux. It's not unusual.

BTW, unlike my new netbook that came with XP and SP3, my linux
installations all work as intended, all the software fully functional
from the get go. No need to initiate an internet connection to The
Collective (microsoft.com) so they will bless my new computer and
remotely enable software I've already paid for, yet currently doesn't
function.

They make 'em for Linux. Of course it'll work.

It's a geek's toy.

If by geek, you mean I don't mind actually shifting my brain into gear
and learning something new, yep! ....I'm a geek. But, that's jes my
experience. Feel free to believe any fairy tales you like.

No, it means that you spend more time ****ing with your computer than with
your SO.

nb, geek

On 2012-01-05, zzzzzzzzzz wrote:

properly and it's rather hard to change settings blind.

Pull yer head outta yer ass.

My Internet radio supports only Windows (several flavors back to Win2K) and
OS/X. No Linux.

Use an online radio. I have no problems listening to internet
radios.

They make 'em for Linux. Of course it'll work.

What bizarre POS made-in-Uzcrapistan hardware do you have that doesn't
work with Linux?

No, it means that you spend more time ****ing with your computer than with
your SO.

I am my SO. Fewer arguments.

nb

--
vi --the root of evil

On Wed, 04 Jan 2012 21:09:57 -0500, "
wrote:

CUPS (linux) in about 30 secs, about 5X faster than getting it working
on a Windows box. Even my scanner is no problem. Some experts claim
Linux now has better hardware support than Windows 7. The myth that
linux has poor hardware support is just that. A long dead myth, at
that.

My tower system won't boot to Linux. Actually, the display won't configure
properly and it's rather hard to change settings blind. This isn't unusual.

WHICH Linux? There are many many many of them out there. Some of
them..older versions...didnt do video very well on unusual cards.

Ive not booted one in hummm 3 or more years that wouldnt boot even on
old 500 mhz machines. Desktops, laptops..you name it.

Here is my mecca for Linux...

http://distrowatch.com/


Dont download anything thats not marked Distribution. There are often a
number of test versions that are used by helpers to debug the code and
whatnot.

If you will note on the far right of the screen..there are about a 100
or so versions of Linux out there..or more. One of my personal favorites
is MINT Linux..as its fairly close to Windows and works nicely with most
hardware.

http://distrowatch.com/table.php?distribution=mint
http://linuxmint.com/


Download it to DVD and run it off the DVD and see if you like it or have
any problems with it.

Of course..Ubuntu is very very popular and works very very well with
most hardware and is heavily supported. See above for running off DVD
or CD

Suse Linux is very good as well and has been well supported for many
years

http://distrowatch.com/table.php?distribution=suse

Its my #3 favorite and is very powerful and is kept updated regularly
with new features and improvements

Now..it depends on what sort of computer (box) you are running. If I
were you..Id pick up a simple used 1.5-3 ghz desktop for $25 somewhere
along with a monitor, keyboard and mouse, and of course either a modem
or network card..and use that box to play with linux on. You will need
at minimum 512 mb memory..perferably 1gibyt or more. Easy and cheap
machine to find. I get full systems for less than $75 with Windows
already on it. and then install your version of Linux as a "dual
boot"...when the machine is turned on..it comes up and asks if you want
ot load Windows, or Mint or....etc etc.

That way you have a spare windows box and you can delete/kill,change,
update or add other versions of Linux

And of course..they are all FREE so you can play with them all you want
for no money.

Keep your windows machine that you are currently using and play with the
second box and check out all the versions of Linux.

Its a very rapidly changing world and Linux has been leading the way in
becoming easier, more powerful and simply better than Windows.

Its fascinating how good most of this stuff is nowadays. I run Windows
very seldom. Im not running Windows on this box in fact..Im running
Xandros with a converter program called Wine..which allows me to run
many many many Windows programs from Linux. Im running Agent 1.93..a
very old version of Forte Agent that Ive used for at least 11 yrs..and
it works smoothly, nicely and quickly under Wine and in Linux

If you havent run Linux in years and are basing your opinion on stuff 2
or more years older...evolution has been very very fast. Seriously.
Nothing is the same as it was 2 or more years ago.

Try it, putter with it. I think you will learn to like it a lot.

Gunner

One could not be a successful Leftwinger without realizing that,
in contrast to the popular conception supported by newspapers
and mothers of Leftwingers, a goodly number of Leftwingers are
not only narrow-minded and dull, but also just stupid.
Gunner Asch

On Wed, 04 Jan 2012 21:12:52 -0500, "
wrote:


Not true for...hummm..at least 10 yrs.

No, it is *still* true. No market == no support.

Chuckle..you have little idea of whats going on out there do you?


You are aware that most commercial sites are running Linux or
Unix..right?

Most? Not! But completely irrelevant.

Actually..yes..most.

And its quite relevant.

Gunner

One could not be a successful Leftwinger without realizing that,
in contrast to the popular conception supported by newspapers
and mothers of Leftwingers, a goodly number of Leftwingers are
not only narrow-minded and dull, but also just stupid.
Gunner Asch

On 1/4/2012 11:00 PM, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Wed, 04 Jan 2012 21:09:57 -0500, "
wrote:

CUPS (linux) in about 30 secs, about 5X faster than getting it working
on a Windows box. Even my scanner is no problem. Some experts claim
Linux now has better hardware support than Windows 7. The myth that
linux has poor hardware support is just that. A long dead myth, at
that.

My tower system won't boot to Linux. Actually, the display won't configure
properly and it's rather hard to change settings blind. This isn't unusual.

WHICH Linux? There are many many many of them out there. Some of
them..older versions...didnt do video very well on unusual cards.

Ive not booted one in hummm 3 or more years that wouldnt boot even on
old 500 mhz machines. Desktops, laptops..you name it.

Here is my mecca for Linux...

http://distrowatch.com/


Dont download anything thats not marked Distribution. There are often a
number of test versions that are used by helpers to debug the code and
whatnot.

If you will note on the far right of the screen..there are about a 100
or so versions of Linux out there..or more. One of my personal favorites
is MINT Linux..as its fairly close to Windows and works nicely with most
hardware.

http://distrowatch.com/table.php?distribution=mint
http://linuxmint.com/


Download it to DVD and run it off the DVD and see if you like it or have
any problems with it.

Of course..Ubuntu is very very popular and works very very well with
most hardware and is heavily supported. See above for running off DVD
or CD

Suse Linux is very good as well and has been well supported for many
years

http://distrowatch.com/table.php?distribution=suse

Its my #3 favorite and is very powerful and is kept updated regularly
with new features and improvements

Now..it depends on what sort of computer (box) you are running. If I
were you..Id pick up a simple used 1.5-3 ghz desktop for $25 somewhere
along with a monitor, keyboard and mouse, and of course either a modem
or network card..and use that box to play with linux on. You will need
at minimum 512 mb memory..perferably 1gibyt or more. Easy and cheap
machine to find. I get full systems for less than $75 with Windows
already on it. and then install your version of Linux as a "dual
boot"...when the machine is turned on..it comes up and asks if you want
ot load Windows, or Mint or....etc etc.

That way you have a spare windows box and you can delete/kill,change,
update or add other versions of Linux

And of course..they are all FREE so you can play with them all you want
for no money.

Keep your windows machine that you are currently using and play with the
second box and check out all the versions of Linux.

Its a very rapidly changing world and Linux has been leading the way in
becoming easier, more powerful and simply better than Windows.

Its fascinating how good most of this stuff is nowadays. I run Windows
very seldom. Im not running Windows on this box in fact..Im running
Xandros with a converter program called Wine..which allows me to run
many many many Windows programs from Linux. Im running Agent 1.93..a
very old version of Forte Agent that Ive used for at least 11 yrs..and
it works smoothly, nicely and quickly under Wine and in Linux

If you havent run Linux in years and are basing your opinion on stuff 2
or more years older...evolution has been very very fast. Seriously.
Nothing is the same as it was 2 or more years ago.

Try it, putter with it. I think you will learn to like it a lot.

Gunner


You should take a look at PC-BSD. It ran on everything "PC based" I
tried it on. It's quite bullet proof too.

http://www.pcbsd.org/

TDD

On Wed, 04 Jan 2012 23:07:13 -0600, The Daring Dufas
wrote:

On 1/4/2012 11:00 PM, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Wed, 04 Jan 2012 21:09:57 -0500, "
wrote:

CUPS (linux) in about 30 secs, about 5X faster than getting it working
on a Windows box. Even my scanner is no problem. Some experts claim
Linux now has better hardware support than Windows 7. The myth that
linux has poor hardware support is just that. A long dead myth, at
that.

My tower system won't boot to Linux. Actually, the display won't configure
properly and it's rather hard to change settings blind. This isn't unusual.

WHICH Linux? There are many many many of them out there. Some of
them..older versions...didnt do video very well on unusual cards.

Ive not booted one in hummm 3 or more years that wouldnt boot even on
old 500 mhz machines. Desktops, laptops..you name it.

Here is my mecca for Linux...

http://distrowatch.com/


Dont download anything thats not marked Distribution. There are often a
number of test versions that are used by helpers to debug the code and
whatnot.

If you will note on the far right of the screen..there are about a 100
or so versions of Linux out there..or more. One of my personal favorites
is MINT Linux..as its fairly close to Windows and works nicely with most
hardware.

http://distrowatch.com/table.php?distribution=mint
http://linuxmint.com/


Download it to DVD and run it off the DVD and see if you like it or have
any problems with it.

Of course..Ubuntu is very very popular and works very very well with
most hardware and is heavily supported. See above for running off DVD
or CD

Suse Linux is very good as well and has been well supported for many
years

http://distrowatch.com/table.php?distribution=suse

Its my #3 favorite and is very powerful and is kept updated regularly
with new features and improvements

Now..it depends on what sort of computer (box) you are running. If I
were you..Id pick up a simple used 1.5-3 ghz desktop for $25 somewhere
along with a monitor, keyboard and mouse, and of course either a modem
or network card..and use that box to play with linux on. You will need
at minimum 512 mb memory..perferably 1gibyt or more. Easy and cheap
machine to find. I get full systems for less than $75 with Windows
already on it. and then install your version of Linux as a "dual
boot"...when the machine is turned on..it comes up and asks if you want
ot load Windows, or Mint or....etc etc.

That way you have a spare windows box and you can delete/kill,change,
update or add other versions of Linux

And of course..they are all FREE so you can play with them all you want
for no money.

Keep your windows machine that you are currently using and play with the
second box and check out all the versions of Linux.

Its a very rapidly changing world and Linux has been leading the way in
becoming easier, more powerful and simply better than Windows.

Its fascinating how good most of this stuff is nowadays. I run Windows
very seldom. Im not running Windows on this box in fact..Im running
Xandros with a converter program called Wine..which allows me to run
many many many Windows programs from Linux. Im running Agent 1.93..a
very old version of Forte Agent that Ive used for at least 11 yrs..and
it works smoothly, nicely and quickly under Wine and in Linux

If you havent run Linux in years and are basing your opinion on stuff 2
or more years older...evolution has been very very fast. Seriously.
Nothing is the same as it was 2 or more years ago.

Try it, putter with it. I think you will learn to like it a lot.

Gunner


You should take a look at PC-BSD. It ran on everything "PC based" I
tried it on. It's quite bullet proof too.

http://www.pcbsd.org/

TDD

Ayup..Its good stuff by all accounts. I had a multi cd version of
something BD 10 yrs ago..and never played with it. Didnt seem to have
as many different versions so Ive just not gotten around to it..but I
hear good things about it.

Isnt it more Unix ? Or something all together different?

Gunner

One could not be a successful Leftwinger without realizing that,
in contrast to the popular conception supported by newspapers
and mothers of Leftwingers, a goodly number of Leftwingers are
not only narrow-minded and dull, but also just stupid.
Gunner Asch

The Daring Dufas wrote:

I pulled a Catalyst 2950 off the shelf that was salvaged from a job and
checked it out. I'll probably use it as a loaner on a job we just bid on
for moving a company into a temporary office trailer while mold
abatement is going on in the building. I'm going to pull one Cat5 from
the server room and move 7 work stations, 3 network printers and 7
phones. For the phones I have to pull a 25 pair Cat1 because the phones
are the freaking old Merlin system sets. They tell us they're supposed
to be getting a new IP Phone system soon. The mold abatement work will
take a couple of months and then we'll have to move them back. The 2950
is a 24 port managed switch but we only need 10 ports or a few more if
someone wants to plug in a laptop or two but I don't have to go buy one.


I've pulled a lot of 25 pair for 1A2 key systems, and for studio
phones at TV studios. The AFTRS station at Ft. Greely had severe
problems with the AM radio station getting into the phones so I added to
new Demark points in the building. One for the offices, and the other
in engineering. Then I pulled out over a mile of station wire. They
were very quiet after that. The Orlando station (Ch. 55) had a really
bad habit of using station wire to set up the phones for their
telethons, and they never used the same layout twice so there was lots
of dead wire in the lighting grid. I cleaned up the 1A2 at WLBE, and
added more phones, then repaired all but one of the existing phones.
The last Merlin system I saw had caught fire at Microdyne's Ocala plant
in 1999. They had already signed a contract for a new phone system and
they were waiting for it to be installed when it went up in flames one
Saturday morning. A lot of smoke and water damage in the executive suite
and Engineering department. You could still catch faint smoke odors a
year later.


The business computer actually belongs to guy who messes it up and one
of the other guys is bad about messing up anything he touches so I want
to set up a computer for them to play with. I don't let them touch my
computers. I call what they do "Drunk Computing" because they usually
foul the things up after a half dozen beers or a fifth of something that
contains a high concentration of ethanol. o_O


Pull a Dilbert and give them Etch-A-Sketches. ;-)

They sound like the VP of marketing that I worked with in Cable TV.
I told him that he was 'Mechanically Declined' in front of my boss. My
boss threw a hissy fit, but the VP told him to shut the hell up because
it was true. Then he grinned and said that 'Cincinnati is the only
system that has my equipment set up and ready to use when I arrive, I
really appreciate it!'


--
You can't have a sense of humor, if you have no sense.

notbob wrote:

On 2012-01-04, Michael A. Terrell wrote:

years since I saw one with real 'Microswitch' switches.

I don't know if they are real microswitches, but the best mouse I ever
found was the early Logitech Mouseman, the asymetric 3 button ones. I
was a CAD designer and had one in my hand for 8-10 hrs day and they
didn't give me grief. The lightest button switches I've ever used. I
still have half a dozen.


A 'Microswitch' based mouse design usually refers to the leaf
operated version of this family:
http://img.diytrade.com/cdimg/66319/...W10_SERIES.jpg
like the one in the top right even though others hae copied the original
Microswitch desgns. Omron is one clone maker.



I tried several trackballs, but they all started paining me after
awhile. I now also have a Microsoft optical trackball with the
jawbreaker sized ball on the thumb side of the mouse. Never had to
spend hours a day with it, but it might have been ergonomically OK
back when I worked. Also very light buttons.


I have never had any luck with trackballs.


--
You can't have a sense of humor, if you have no sense.

On Jan 4, 9:37*pm, notbob wrote:
On 2012-01-05, wrote:

properly and it's rather hard to change settings blind.

Pull yer head outta yer ass.

My Internet radio supports only Windows (several flavors back to Win2K) and
OS/X. *No Linux.

Use an online radio. *I have no problems listening to internet
radios.

They make 'em for Linux. *Of course it'll work.

What bizarre POS made-in-Uzcrapistan hardware do you have that doesn't
work with Linux?


Canon scanners. Don't buy Canon.

nate

On 1/5/2012 8:33 AM, Michael A. Terrell wrote:

The Daring Dufas wrote:

I pulled a Catalyst 2950 off the shelf that was salvaged from a job and
checked it out. I'll probably use it as a loaner on a job we just bid on
for moving a company into a temporary office trailer while mold
abatement is going on in the building. I'm going to pull one Cat5 from
the server room and move 7 work stations, 3 network printers and 7
phones. For the phones I have to pull a 25 pair Cat1 because the phones
are the freaking old Merlin system sets. They tell us they're supposed
to be getting a new IP Phone system soon. The mold abatement work will
take a couple of months and then we'll have to move them back. The 2950
is a 24 port managed switch but we only need 10 ports or a few more if
someone wants to plug in a laptop or two but I don't have to go buy one.


I've pulled a lot of 25 pair for 1A2 key systems, and for studio
phones at TV studios. The AFTRS station at Ft. Greely had severe
problems with the AM radio station getting into the phones so I added to
new Demark points in the building. One for the offices, and the other
in engineering. Then I pulled out over a mile of station wire. They
were very quiet after that. The Orlando station (Ch. 55) had a really
bad habit of using station wire to set up the phones for their
telethons, and they never used the same layout twice so there was lots
of dead wire in the lighting grid. I cleaned up the 1A2 at WLBE, and
added more phones, then repaired all but one of the existing phones.
The last Merlin system I saw had caught fire at Microdyne's Ocala plant
in 1999. They had already signed a contract for a new phone system and
they were waiting for it to be installed when it went up in flames one
Saturday morning. A lot of smoke and water damage in the executive suite
and Engineering department. You could still catch faint smoke odors a
year later.


The old Merlin is not 1A2, it's the funky electronic Merlin horror show
that Ma Bell saddled customers with. It uses 4 pair and an RJ45 plug on
the cord. I sort of liked the old 1A2 systems, they were hard to break
and you could hit a burglar over the head with the phone then call the
cops with the bloody set to come pick up the corpse. The electronic
Merlin can quit working if you hang up too hard.

The business computer actually belongs to guy who messes it up and one
of the other guys is bad about messing up anything he touches so I want
to set up a computer for them to play with. I don't let them touch my
computers. I call what they do "Drunk Computing" because they usually
foul the things up after a half dozen beers or a fifth of something that
contains a high concentration of ethanol. o_O


Pull a Dilbert and give them Etch-A-Sketches. ;-)

They sound like the VP of marketing that I worked with in Cable TV.
I told him that he was 'Mechanically Declined' in front of my boss. My
boss threw a hissy fit, but the VP told him to shut the hell up because
it was true. Then he grinned and said that 'Cincinnati is the only
system that has my equipment set up and ready to use when I arrive, I
really appreciate it!'


The guys really don't understand computers that well so I can really
mess with their minds like when I drop a live Linux CD into the optical
drive and leave it running. ^_^

TDD

On 5 Jan 2012 02:37:00 GMT, notbob wrote:

On 2012-01-05, zzzzzzzzzz wrote:

properly and it's rather hard to change settings blind.

Pull yer head outta yer ass.

Your only argument?

My Internet radio supports only Windows (several flavors back to Win2K) and
OS/X. No Linux.

Use an online radio. I have no problems listening to internet
radios.

Clueless, as always. The fact is that there is a *lot* of hardware that does
*NOT* support Linux, and never will.

They make 'em for Linux. Of course it'll work.

What bizarre POS made-in-Uzcrapistan hardware do you have that doesn't
work with Linux?

*LOTS*. Look at the required system for hardware, some time.

No, it means that you spend more time ****ing with your computer than with
your SO.

I am my SO. Fewer arguments.

Why am I not surprised?

On Wed, 04 Jan 2012 21:00:34 -0800, Gunner Asch wrote:

On Wed, 04 Jan 2012 21:09:57 -0500, "
wrote:

CUPS (linux) in about 30 secs, about 5X faster than getting it working
on a Windows box. Even my scanner is no problem. Some experts claim
Linux now has better hardware support than Windows 7. The myth that
linux has poor hardware support is just that. A long dead myth, at
that.

My tower system won't boot to Linux. Actually, the display won't configure
properly and it's rather hard to change settings blind. This isn't unusual.

WHICH Linux? There are many many many of them out there. Some of
them..older versions...didnt do video very well on unusual cards.

Ubuntu.

Ive not booted one in hummm 3 or more years that wouldnt boot even on
old 500 mhz machines. Desktops, laptops..you name it.

Here is my mecca for Linux...

http://distrowatch.com/

No time to futz with it now. I have the system with me here, but no time to
even plug it in.

Dont download anything thats not marked Distribution. There are often a
number of test versions that are used by helpers to debug the code and
whatnot.

Sure...

If you will note on the far right of the screen..there are about a 100
or so versions of Linux out there..or more. One of my personal favorites
is MINT Linux..as its fairly close to Windows and works nicely with most
hardware.

http://distrowatch.com/table.php?distribution=mint
http://linuxmint.com/


Download it to DVD and run it off the DVD and see if you like it or have
any problems with it.

I've done that. Every one I tried came up with a zero point font. No work.

Of course..Ubuntu is very very popular and works very very well with
most hardware and is heavily supported. See above for running off DVD
or CD

I bought Ubuntu. Same thing. The system used to work with SUSE 9.x. Not
since.

Suse Linux is very good as well and has been well supported for many
years

http://distrowatch.com/table.php?distribution=suse

Its my #3 favorite and is very powerful and is kept updated regularly
with new features and improvements

Too much of a PITA to get anything to work. I spent weeks chasing
incompatibilities. No thanks. I have no interest in being a systems
engineer. I just want the damned thing to work. Linux doesn't.

Now..it depends on what sort of computer (box) you are running. If I
were you..Id pick up a simple used 1.5-3 ghz desktop for $25 somewhere
along with a monitor, keyboard and mouse, and of course either a modem
or network card..and use that box to play with linux on. You will need
at minimum 512 mb memory..perferably 1gibyt or more. Easy and cheap
machine to find. I get full systems for less than $75 with Windows
already on it. and then install your version of Linux as a "dual
boot"...when the machine is turned on..it comes up and asks if you want
ot load Windows, or Mint or....etc etc.

It's rather old, now. It's an older Athlon64. 4GB.

That way you have a spare windows box and you can delete/kill,change,
update or add other versions of Linux

I have two Win systems (laptop and a netbook). Wife has two more (laptops). I
don't need another.

And of course..they are all FREE so you can play with them all you want
for no money.

Time is money.

Keep your windows machine that you are currently using and play with the
second box and check out all the versions of Linux.

Its a very rapidly changing world and Linux has been leading the way in
becoming easier, more powerful and simply better than Windows.

Its fascinating how good most of this stuff is nowadays. I run Windows
very seldom. Im not running Windows on this box in fact..Im running
Xandros with a converter program called Wine..which allows me to run
many many many Windows programs from Linux. Im running Agent 1.93..a
very old version of Forte Agent that Ive used for at least 11 yrs..and
it works smoothly, nicely and quickly under Wine and in Linux

If you havent run Linux in years and are basing your opinion on stuff 2
or more years older...evolution has been very very fast. Seriously.
Nothing is the same as it was 2 or more years ago.

Try it, putter with it. I think you will learn to like it a lot.

I did a few years ago. I got quite frustrated with dueling libraries. I
don't have time with that crap. As crappy as Win is, it works now. Linux
doesn't.

Gunner

One could not be a successful Leftwinger without realizing that,
in contrast to the popular conception supported by newspapers
and mothers of Leftwingers, a goodly number of Leftwingers are
not only narrow-minded and dull, but also just stupid.
Gunner Asch

On Wed, 04 Jan 2012 21:01:56 -0800, Gunner Asch wrote:

On Wed, 04 Jan 2012 21:12:52 -0500, "
wrote:


Not true for...hummm..at least 10 yrs.

No, it is *still* true. No market == no support.

Chuckle..you have little idea of whats going on out there do you?

Yes, in fact I do.


You are aware that most commercial sites are running Linux or
Unix..right?

Most? Not! But completely irrelevant.

Actually..yes..most.

Nope.

And its quite relevant.

Hardly.
Gunner

One could not be a successful Leftwinger without realizing that,
in contrast to the popular conception supported by newspapers
and mothers of Leftwingers, a goodly number of Leftwingers are
not only narrow-minded and dull, but also just stupid.
Gunner Asch

On 2012-01-06, zzzzzzzzzz wrote:

Why am I not surprised?

I'm amazed you can even breath on yer own.

nb

--
vi --the root of evil

The Daring Dufas wrote:

On 1/5/2012 8:33 AM, Michael A. Terrell wrote:

The Daring Dufas wrote:

I pulled a Catalyst 2950 off the shelf that was salvaged from a job and
checked it out. I'll probably use it as a loaner on a job we just bid on
for moving a company into a temporary office trailer while mold
abatement is going on in the building. I'm going to pull one Cat5 from
the server room and move 7 work stations, 3 network printers and 7
phones. For the phones I have to pull a 25 pair Cat1 because the phones
are the freaking old Merlin system sets. They tell us they're supposed
to be getting a new IP Phone system soon. The mold abatement work will
take a couple of months and then we'll have to move them back. The 2950
is a 24 port managed switch but we only need 10 ports or a few more if
someone wants to plug in a laptop or two but I don't have to go buy one.


I've pulled a lot of 25 pair for 1A2 key systems, and for studio
phones at TV studios. The AFTRS station at Ft. Greely had severe
problems with the AM radio station getting into the phones so I added to
new Demark points in the building. One for the offices, and the other
in engineering. Then I pulled out over a mile of station wire. They
were very quiet after that. The Orlando station (Ch. 55) had a really
bad habit of using station wire to set up the phones for their
telethons, and they never used the same layout twice so there was lots
of dead wire in the lighting grid. I cleaned up the 1A2 at WLBE, and
added more phones, then repaired all but one of the existing phones.
The last Merlin system I saw had caught fire at Microdyne's Ocala plant
in 1999. They had already signed a contract for a new phone system and
they were waiting for it to be installed when it went up in flames one
Saturday morning. A lot of smoke and water damage in the executive suite
and Engineering department. You could still catch faint smoke odors a
year later.


The old Merlin is not 1A2, it's the funky electronic Merlin horror show
that Ma Bell saddled customers with. It uses 4 pair and an RJ45 plug on
the cord. I sort of liked the old 1A2 systems, they were hard to break
and you could hit a burglar over the head with the phone then call the
cops with the bloody set to come pick up the corpse. The electronic
Merlin can quit working if you hang up too hard.



I know the difference in the two systems. I was just pointing out
that the Merlins couldn't even die gracefully. The biggest failures in
1A2 were the line selector switches and the DTMF keypads. (Most of what
I worked with were S.C.)

The next group of failure were power supply fuses, and wiring. I had
one TV studio building hit by a direct lightning strike that blew away
some of the reinforced concrete where the lines ran from the STL tower
to the control room. Some of the Electrical system exploded, but all I
needed for the 1A2 was a full new set of fuses. I still have a couple
new 400E cards and some used power supplies. The only bad line cards I
ever saw were in the Army. One guy in the Telephone section would
collect the couple cards that failed, every couple months so I could
cannibalize them for the relays.


One of my cousins was an EE who worked for Northern Electric,
building and testing their early ESS. He would follow a new ESS
exchange through final test, then follow it to the jobsite to make sure
it was installed properly, and got a sign off from the local Telco. He
did that for years, until he ended up being hired by a Telco near
Atlanta.


The guys really don't understand computers that well so I can really
mess with their minds like when I drop a live Linux CD into the optical
drive and leave it running. ^_^


I use a live Lucid Puppy CD to test hardware. It works when a lot of
other releases refuse to boot and tell me that they don't support the
hardware. I've recently picked up several XP systems that lost
networking all at the same time, but the Lucid Puppy boots them and they
can go online. I haven't felt well enough to drag them to my bench to
diagnose them, yet.


--
You can't have a sense of humor, if you have no sense.

On 6 Jan 2012 01:59:48 GMT, notbob wrote:

On 2012-01-06, zzzzzzzzzz wrote:

Why am I not surprised?

I'm amazed you can even breath on yer own.

I've said the same about you many times, nutjob. Why don't you come up with
something original (no, don't, I know why)?

On 2012-01-05, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Wed, 04 Jan 2012 23:07:13 -0600, The Daring Dufas
wrote:

On 1/4/2012 11:00 PM, Gunner Asch wrote:

[ ... ]

If you havent run Linux in years and are basing your opinion on stuff 2
or more years older...evolution has been very very fast. Seriously.
Nothing is the same as it was 2 or more years ago.

Try it, putter with it. I think you will learn to like it a lot.

Indeed so.

[ ... ]

You should take a look at PC-BSD. It ran on everything "PC based" I
tried it on. It's quite bullet proof too.

http://www.pcbsd.org/

And I tend to prefer OpenBSD -- but because it is *less*
Windows-like. It concentrates on security, so I use it for systems
which are exposed to outside -- and for building a firewall, and other
systems are used from behind the firewall.

http://www.openbsd.com

or

http://www.openbsd.org (they are both the same system. :-)

[ ... ]

Ayup..Its good stuff by all accounts. I had a multi cd version of
something BD 10 yrs ago..and never played with it. Didnt seem to have
as many different versions so Ive just not gotten around to it..but I
hear good things about it.

Isnt it more Unix ? Or something all together different?

Warning -- what follows may be a lot more than you wanted to
know. :-)

Well ... by real standards, linux is a unix as well. But the
life history of unix (or the family tree, if you prefer) is strange.

It started in the depths of AT&T, and had gotten up to "Version
6" before it escaped much. Universities got the source license, and
started working with it, adding to it. Version 7 was more widely
distributed -- often with licenses without source.

One university in particular, University of California at
Berkeley, did a *lot* of development, adding things to the utilities and
the kernel. It eventually grew to be its own flavor of unix, called
"BSD" (Berkeley Software Distribution). And the earliest which I have
seen mention of are in the 2.x versions.

Among other things BSD had the first screen based editor "vi"
(spelled out, not pronounced "vie" or "six". :-) Before that, all
editors were line editors.

Then AT&T started releasing a commercial version of unix, called
"System III" (skipping over the 2 that BSD was using). BSD then skipped
over 3, and went to 4.x, and AT&T to "System V".

But distribution of BSD was hampered by it having some AT&T
copyrighted code in it, so you had to have a license from AT&T to run
the free OS from BSD. This finally ended with BSD 4.6 (fully AT&T
free), about the time that the university got out of the OS game
entirely. But this free code became the parent of all the free and open
source BSD flavors around the world.

Somewhere around this time, AT&T started playing with a new OS
called "Plan 9", and may still be doing that internally. But they sold
the rights to unix to -- who was it now? But that company eventually
sold the rights to unix to SCO (Santa Cruz Organization), which
proceeded to sue everyone with a unix like OS for licensing fees. They
were finally shut down.

In the meanwhile, linux was started by Linus Thorvalds, which
was written from scratch to work like unix, but to not have a single
line of AT&T copyrighted code init. (He may have started from another
minimal unix kernel written by someone to use as a tool for teaching OS
programming -- called Minux (or was that Minix?). Linux got hit by the
SCO lawsuit along with anything else unix like.

The oldest examples I have of the various ones is v7 unix on
a Motorola MC68000 CPU, BSD 4.2 on a National Semiconductor CPU and made
by Tektronix, and SysVr2 on an AT&T Unix-PC/7300/3B1 (again Motorola
MC68010 this time.)

So -- in the legal sense, linux is not unix, in that it has no
history from AT&T's code. BSD is now also not unix, because it rewrote
all the code which was AT&T, so only the SysV systems are really still
unix, though they have absorbed many features of BSD. I'm still using
Sun workstations running Solaris 10 as an example of that. (Sun was
running a BSD based unix until their version of SunOs 4.1.4, and then
they switched to SunOs 5.x (called Solaris 2.x). Solaris has a directory
of binaries in /usr/ucb, and if you put that in your search path before
/usr/bin, you will get more of a BSD feel in the OS. "ucb" stands for
"University of California, Berkeley", FWIW.

Enjoy,
DoN.

--
Remove oil spill source from e-mail
Email: | Voice (all times): (703) 938-4564
(too) near Washington D.C. | http://www.d-and-d.com/dnichols/DoN.html
--- Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero ---

On 1/5/2012 8:46 PM, Michael A. Terrell wrote:

The Daring Dufas wrote:

On 1/5/2012 8:33 AM, Michael A. Terrell wrote:

The Daring Dufas wrote:

I pulled a Catalyst 2950 off the shelf that was salvaged from a job and
checked it out. I'll probably use it as a loaner on a job we just bid on
for moving a company into a temporary office trailer while mold
abatement is going on in the building. I'm going to pull one Cat5 from
the server room and move 7 work stations, 3 network printers and 7
phones. For the phones I have to pull a 25 pair Cat1 because the phones
are the freaking old Merlin system sets. They tell us they're supposed
to be getting a new IP Phone system soon. The mold abatement work will
take a couple of months and then we'll have to move them back. The 2950
is a 24 port managed switch but we only need 10 ports or a few more if
someone wants to plug in a laptop or two but I don't have to go buy one.


I've pulled a lot of 25 pair for 1A2 key systems, and for studio
phones at TV studios. The AFTRS station at Ft. Greely had severe
problems with the AM radio station getting into the phones so I added to
new Demark points in the building. One for the offices, and the other
in engineering. Then I pulled out over a mile of station wire. They
were very quiet after that. The Orlando station (Ch. 55) had a really
bad habit of using station wire to set up the phones for their
telethons, and they never used the same layout twice so there was lots
of dead wire in the lighting grid. I cleaned up the 1A2 at WLBE, and
added more phones, then repaired all but one of the existing phones.
The last Merlin system I saw had caught fire at Microdyne's Ocala plant
in 1999. They had already signed a contract for a new phone system and
they were waiting for it to be installed when it went up in flames one
Saturday morning. A lot of smoke and water damage in the executive suite
and Engineering department. You could still catch faint smoke odors a
year later.


The old Merlin is not 1A2, it's the funky electronic Merlin horror show
that Ma Bell saddled customers with. It uses 4 pair and an RJ45 plug on
the cord. I sort of liked the old 1A2 systems, they were hard to break
and you could hit a burglar over the head with the phone then call the
cops with the bloody set to come pick up the corpse. The electronic
Merlin can quit working if you hang up too hard.



I know the difference in the two systems. I was just pointing out
that the Merlins couldn't even die gracefully. The biggest failures in
1A2 were the line selector switches and the DTMF keypads. (Most of what
I worked with were S.C.)

The next group of failure were power supply fuses, and wiring. I had
one TV studio building hit by a direct lightning strike that blew away
some of the reinforced concrete where the lines ran from the STL tower
to the control room. Some of the Electrical system exploded, but all I
needed for the 1A2 was a full new set of fuses. I still have a couple
new 400E cards and some used power supplies. The only bad line cards I
ever saw were in the Army. One guy in the Telephone section would
collect the couple cards that failed, every couple months so I could
cannibalize them for the relays.


One of my cousins was an EE who worked for Northern Electric,
building and testing their early ESS. He would follow a new ESS
exchange through final test, then follow it to the jobsite to make sure
it was installed properly, and got a sign off from the local Telco. He
did that for years, until he ended up being hired by a Telco near
Atlanta.


The guys really don't understand computers that well so I can really
mess with their minds like when I drop a live Linux CD into the optical
drive and leave it running. ^_^


I use a live Lucid Puppy CD to test hardware. It works when a lot of
other releases refuse to boot and tell me that they don't support the
hardware. I've recently picked up several XP systems that lost
networking all at the same time, but the Lucid Puppy boots them and they
can go online. I haven't felt well enough to drag them to my bench to
diagnose them, yet.


I've been using Puppy rather than Knoppix for some time now to test a
system before I dig into it and I haven't really had a problem with it
working on anything PC based. Good Doggie! ^_^

TDD

On 2012-01-06, DoN. Nichols wrote:

And I tend to prefer OpenBSD


I also occasionally use OpenBSD, my preference of all the BSDs. It
should be noted they have contributed mightily to the *nix disporia.
Their reworked version of secure shell, OpenSSH, has become the
defacto standard used by almost all *nixes.

So -- in the legal sense, linux is not unix, in that it has no
history from AT&T's code. BSD is now also not unix, because it rewrote
all the code which was AT&T, so only the SysV systems are really still
unix, though they have absorbed many features of BSD.

Technically, you are correct. OTOH, Linux is so much like unix,
anyone truly comfortable with basic Linux would not feel out of place
on a unix box. I can see problems amongst ubuntu users, but users of,
say, Slackware or Gentoo would have few problems. I've pretty much
tried all the unix variants and settled on Slackware, it being the
most unix-like of the Linux distros, IMO.

nb

--
vi --the root of evil

On Fri, 06 Jan 2012 15:20:29 +0000, notbob wrote:
On 2012-01-06, DoN. Nichols wrote:
And I tend to prefer OpenBSD

I also occasionally use OpenBSD, my preference of all the BSDs. It
should be noted they have contributed mightily to the *nix disporia.
Their reworked version of secure shell, OpenSSH, has become the defacto
standard used by almost all *nixes.

So -- in the legal sense, linux is not unix, in that it has no
history from AT&T's code. BSD is now also not unix, because it rewrote
all the code which was AT&T, so only the SysV systems are really still
unix, though they have absorbed many features of BSD.

Technically, you are correct. OTOH, Linux is so much like unix, anyone
truly comfortable with basic Linux would not feel out of place on a unix
box. I can see problems amongst ubuntu users, but users of, say,
Slackware or Gentoo would have few problems. I've pretty much tried all
the unix variants and settled on Slackware, it being the most unix-like
of the Linux distros, IMO.

Slackware was the first Linux distribution that I used, when I
switched from MS stuff back in 1993. I ran Linux 0.98 on a 4MB
'486 system and ca. 200MB of disk, with excellent reliability.

--
jiw

James Waldby fired this volley in news:je82cv$6cf$1
@dont-email.me:

Slackware was the first Linux distribution that I used, when I
switched from MS stuff back in 1993. I ran Linux 0.98 on a 4MB
'486 system and ca. 200MB of disk, with excellent reliability.

Ran Slackware .98 on a 486-50 with Apache server, and it ran 380 days
before we took it down to see what was the matter!

Lloyd

On 2012-01-06, notbob wrote:
On 2012-01-06, DoN. Nichols wrote:

And I tend to prefer OpenBSD


I also occasionally use OpenBSD, my preference of all the BSDs. It
should be noted they have contributed mightily to the *nix disporia.
Their reworked version of secure shell, OpenSSH, has become the
defacto standard used by almost all *nixes.

It is even the version supplied by Sun in Solaris 10. (And
presumably still by Oracle, who took over Sun. :-(

So -- in the legal sense, linux is not unix, in that it has no
history from AT&T's code. BSD is now also not unix, because it rewrote
all the code which was AT&T, so only the SysV systems are really still
unix, though they have absorbed many features of BSD.

Technically, you are correct. OTOH, Linux is so much like unix,
anyone truly comfortable with basic Linux would not feel out of place
on a unix box.

And there are similar difference between BSD flavors and SysV
flavors. In particular (for me) the options fed to ps(1) for about the
same output a

ps -ale (SysV)
ps -alx (BSD)

with small differences in the output, but those are the options which I
most often use. (Though I tend to use "-lax" with BSD, just because it
forms a word as does "-ale" in SysV. :-) The program does not care about
the order of options anyway, so why not make it easier for the user to
remember?

Also -- the format of the output of df(1) varies significantly,
so I tend to prefer

df -h

on anything new enough to support it, or

df -k

on the older ones, which makes BSD and SysV look similar enough to keep
me happy. :-)

I can see problems amongst ubuntu users, but users of,
say, Slackware or Gentoo would have few problems. I've pretty much
tried all the unix variants and settled on Slackware, it being the
most unix-like of the Linux distros, IMO.

FWIW, the term "distro" has bugged me since I first heard it. :-)

SysV has changed significantly (based on Solaris 10), in that
what used to be handled (on startup or run level changes) by the files
in /etc/init.d and triggered by /etc/rc?.d links into the latter, is now
handled by a database maintained by svcadm with lots of options, and to
see what is what, you use svcs -a to see what daemons are online and
offline.

And BSD tends to do all of this with just a few files, /etc/rc,
/etc/rc.local, and corresponding filename.conf files. Though I
understand that things have gotten different in the most recent release
of OpenBSD, which I do not yet have.

And SysVr2 (as exemplified by the Unix-PC/7300/3B1 is closer to
the BSD way of doing things than the later SysV versions.

I did prefer the /etc/init.d directory in older SysV, and would
like to see it in OpenBSD as well.

But all of this is about administering the system, not using it. :-)

Enjoy,
DoN.

--
Remove oil spill source from e-mail
Email: | Voice (all times): (703) 938-4564
(too) near Washington D.C. | http://www.d-and-d.com/dnichols/DoN.html
--- Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero ---

On 6 Jan 2012 05:38:53 GMT, "DoN. Nichols"
wrote:

On 2012-01-05, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Wed, 04 Jan 2012 23:07:13 -0600, The Daring Dufas
wrote:

On 1/4/2012 11:00 PM, Gunner Asch wrote:

[ ... ]

If you havent run Linux in years and are basing your opinion on stuff 2
or more years older...evolution has been very very fast. Seriously.
Nothing is the same as it was 2 or more years ago.

Try it, putter with it. I think you will learn to like it a lot.

Indeed so.

[ ... ]

You should take a look at PC-BSD. It ran on everything "PC based" I
tried it on. It's quite bullet proof too.

http://www.pcbsd.org/

And I tend to prefer OpenBSD -- but because it is *less*
Windows-like. It concentrates on security, so I use it for systems
which are exposed to outside -- and for building a firewall, and other
systems are used from behind the firewall.

http://www.openbsd.com

or

http://www.openbsd.org (they are both the same system. :-)

[ ... ]

Ayup..Its good stuff by all accounts. I had a multi cd version of
something BD 10 yrs ago..and never played with it. Didnt seem to have
as many different versions so Ive just not gotten around to it..but I
hear good things about it.

Isnt it more Unix ? Or something all together different?

Warning -- what follows may be a lot more than you wanted to
know. :-)

Well ... by real standards, linux is a unix as well. But the
life history of unix (or the family tree, if you prefer) is strange.

It started in the depths of AT&T, and had gotten up to "Version
6" before it escaped much. Universities got the source license, and
started working with it, adding to it. Version 7 was more widely
distributed -- often with licenses without source.

One university in particular, University of California at
Berkeley, did a *lot* of development, adding things to the utilities and
the kernel. It eventually grew to be its own flavor of unix, called
"BSD" (Berkeley Software Distribution). And the earliest which I have
seen mention of are in the 2.x versions.

Among other things BSD had the first screen based editor "vi"
(spelled out, not pronounced "vie" or "six". :-) Before that, all
editors were line editors.

Then AT&T started releasing a commercial version of unix, called
"System III" (skipping over the 2 that BSD was using). BSD then skipped
over 3, and went to 4.x, and AT&T to "System V".

But distribution of BSD was hampered by it having some AT&T
copyrighted code in it, so you had to have a license from AT&T to run
the free OS from BSD. This finally ended with BSD 4.6 (fully AT&T
free), about the time that the university got out of the OS game
entirely. But this free code became the parent of all the free and open
source BSD flavors around the world.

Somewhere around this time, AT&T started playing with a new OS
called "Plan 9", and may still be doing that internally. But they sold
the rights to unix to -- who was it now? But that company eventually
sold the rights to unix to SCO (Santa Cruz Organization), which
proceeded to sue everyone with a unix like OS for licensing fees. They
were finally shut down.

In the meanwhile, linux was started by Linus Thorvalds, which
was written from scratch to work like unix, but to not have a single
line of AT&T copyrighted code init. (He may have started from another
minimal unix kernel written by someone to use as a tool for teaching OS
programming -- called Minux (or was that Minix?). Linux got hit by the
SCO lawsuit along with anything else unix like.

The oldest examples I have of the various ones is v7 unix on
a Motorola MC68000 CPU, BSD 4.2 on a National Semiconductor CPU and made
by Tektronix, and SysVr2 on an AT&T Unix-PC/7300/3B1 (again Motorola
MC68010 this time.)

So -- in the legal sense, linux is not unix, in that it has no
history from AT&T's code. BSD is now also not unix, because it rewrote
all the code which was AT&T, so only the SysV systems are really still
unix, though they have absorbed many features of BSD. I'm still using
Sun workstations running Solaris 10 as an example of that. (Sun was
running a BSD based unix until their version of SunOs 4.1.4, and then
they switched to SunOs 5.x (called Solaris 2.x). Solaris has a directory
of binaries in /usr/ucb, and if you put that in your search path before
/usr/bin, you will get more of a BSD feel in the OS. "ucb" stands for
"University of California, Berkeley", FWIW.

Enjoy,
DoN.

Saved! Marvelous explaination! Thanks!!!

Gunner

One could not be a successful Leftwinger without realizing that,
in contrast to the popular conception supported by newspapers
and mothers of Leftwingers, a goodly number of Leftwingers are
not only narrow-minded and dull, but also just stupid.
Gunner Asch

On 01/05/2012 09:38 PM, DoN. Nichols wrote:
On 2012-01-05, Gunner wrote:
On Wed, 04 Jan 2012 23:07:13 -0600, The Daring Dufas
wrote:

On 1/4/2012 11:00 PM, Gunner Asch wrote:

[ ... ]

If you havent run Linux in years and are basing your opinion on stuff 2
or more years older...evolution has been very very fast. Seriously.
Nothing is the same as it was 2 or more years ago.

Try it, putter with it. I think you will learn to like it a lot.

Indeed so.

[ ... ]

You should take a look at PC-BSD. It ran on everything "PC based" I
tried it on. It's quite bullet proof too.

http://www.pcbsd.org/

And I tend to prefer OpenBSD -- but because it is *less*
Windows-like. It concentrates on security, so I use it for systems
which are exposed to outside -- and for building a firewall, and other
systems are used from behind the firewall.

http://www.openbsd.com

or

http://www.openbsd.org (they are both the same system. :-)

[ ... ]

Ayup..Its good stuff by all accounts. I had a multi cd version of
something BD 10 yrs ago..and never played with it. Didnt seem to have
as many different versions so Ive just not gotten around to it..but I
hear good things about it.

Isnt it more Unix ? Or something all together different?

Warning -- what follows may be a lot more than you wanted to
know. :-)

Well ... by real standards, linux is a unix as well. But the
life history of unix (or the family tree, if you prefer) is strange.

It started in the depths of AT&T, and had gotten up to "Version
6" before it escaped much. Universities got the source license, and
started working with it, adding to it. Version 7 was more widely
distributed -- often with licenses without source.

One university in particular, University of California at
Berkeley, did a *lot* of development, adding things to the utilities and
the kernel. It eventually grew to be its own flavor of unix, called
"BSD" (Berkeley Software Distribution). And the earliest which I have
seen mention of are in the 2.x versions.


Berkeley did a lot of work on Version 7 Unix also called BSD.
You had to have a V7 source license to get it.

BSD became the standard for the VAX, because Unix 32V, from AT&T didn't
work very well.
You had to have a 32V source license to get it.
I don't know of any VAX, that ran the AT&T distribution.

Among other things BSD had the first screen based editor "vi"
(spelled out, not pronounced "vie" or "six". :-) Before that, all
editors were line editors.


Almost :-). The Rand editor was about a year earlier.

Then AT&T started releasing a commercial version of unix, called
"System III" (skipping over the 2 that BSD was using). BSD then skipped
over 3, and went to 4.x, and AT&T to "System V".

But distribution of BSD was hampered by it having some AT&T
copyrighted code in it, so you had to have a license from AT&T to run
the free OS from BSD. This finally ended with BSD 4.6 (fully AT&T
free), about the time that the university got out of the OS game
entirely. But this free code became the parent of all the free and open
source BSD flavors around the world.

Somewhere around this time, AT&T started playing with a new OS
called "Plan 9", and may still be doing that internally. But they sold
the rights to unix to -- who was it now? But that company eventually
sold the rights to unix to SCO (Santa Cruz Organization), which
proceeded to sue everyone with a unix like OS for licensing fees. They
were finally shut down.


Unix went from AT&T to Novell to SCO.
SCO was originally formed to market and support Microsoft Xenix.
There were several large parties, when SCO disappeared.

In the meanwhile, linux was started by Linus Thorvalds, which
was written from scratch to work like unix, but to not have a single
line of AT&T copyrighted code init. (He may have started from another
minimal unix kernel written by someone to use as a tool for teaching OS
programming -- called Minux (or was that Minix?).

Minix.

Linux got hit by the
SCO lawsuit along with anything else unix like.

The oldest examples I have of the various ones is v7 unix on
a Motorola MC68000 CPU, BSD 4.2 on a National Semiconductor CPU and made
by Tektronix, and SysVr2 on an AT&T Unix-PC/7300/3B1 (again Motorola
MC68010 this time.)

The Unix-PC, was made by Convergent Technology.


So -- in the legal sense, linux is not unix, in that it has no
history from AT&T's code. BSD is now also not unix, because it rewrote
all the code which was AT&T, so only the SysV systems are really still
unix, though they have absorbed many features of BSD. I'm still using
Sun workstations running Solaris 10 as an example of that. (Sun was
running a BSD based unix until their version of SunOs 4.1.4, and then
they switched to SunOs 5.x (called Solaris 2.x). Solaris has a directory
of binaries in /usr/ucb, and if you put that in your search path before
/usr/bin, you will get more of a BSD feel in the OS. "ucb" stands for
"University of California, Berkeley", FWIW.

Enjoy,
DoN.



--
Gary A. Gorgen | "From ideas to PRODUCTS"
| Tunxis Design Inc.
| Cupertino, Ca. 95014

On 2012-01-08, Gary A. Gorgen wrote:

Unix went from AT&T to Novell to SCO.
SCO was originally formed to market and support Microsoft Xenix.
There were several large parties, when SCO disappeared.

Which was too bad, as the original Santa Cruz incarnation was pretty
sharp. I learned Unix on sys 5 UnixWare and one of the first Linux
distros I ever tried was Caldera Linux. CL could have been the first
Ubuntu, as it was definitely aimed at the clueless. Upon first
intall, it immediately fired up a game of tetris for the user to play
while it installed itself in the background. Unfortunately, SCO got
taken over by a buncha patent troll shysters and committed corporate
suicide by taking on IBM and a non-entity. Morons.

nb

--
vi --the root of evil

Gary A. Gorgen Inscribed thus:

Unix went from AT&T to Novell to SCO.
SCO was originally formed to market and support Microsoft Xenix.
There were several large parties, when SCO disappeared.

I thought that Novell retained the rights to the Unix name ? Something
to do with "Unix Labs".

--
Best Regards:
Baron.

On 2012-01-08, Gary A. Gorgen wrote:
On 01/05/2012 09:38 PM, DoN. Nichols wrote:
On 2012-01-05, Gunner wrote:

[ ... ]

http://www.pcbsd.org/

And I tend to prefer OpenBSD -- but because it is *less*
Windows-like. It concentrates on security, so I use it for systems
which are exposed to outside -- and for building a firewall, and other
systems are used from behind the firewall.

http://www.openbsd.com

[ ... ]

Ayup..Its good stuff by all accounts. I had a multi cd version of
something BD 10 yrs ago..and never played with it. Didnt seem to have
as many different versions so Ive just not gotten around to it..but I
hear good things about it.

Isnt it more Unix ? Or something all together different?

Warning -- what follows may be a lot more than you wanted to
know. :-)

Well ... by real standards, linux is a unix as well. But the
life history of unix (or the family tree, if you prefer) is strange.

It started in the depths of AT&T, and had gotten up to "Version
6" before it escaped much. Universities got the source license, and
started working with it, adding to it. Version 7 was more widely
distributed -- often with licenses without source.

One university in particular, University of California at
Berkeley, did a *lot* of development, adding things to the utilities and
the kernel. It eventually grew to be its own flavor of unix, called
"BSD" (Berkeley Software Distribution). And the earliest which I have
seen mention of are in the 2.x versions.


Berkeley did a lot of work on Version 7 Unix also called BSD.
You had to have a V7 source license to get it.

BSD became the standard for the VAX, because Unix 32V, from AT&T didn't
work very well.
You had to have a 32V source license to get it.
I don't know of any VAX, that ran the AT&T distribution.

For good reasons. :-)

[ ... ]

Somewhere around this time, AT&T started playing with a new OS
called "Plan 9", and may still be doing that internally. But they sold
the rights to unix to -- who was it now? But that company eventually
sold the rights to unix to SCO (Santa Cruz Organization), which
proceeded to sue everyone with a unix like OS for licensing fees. They
were finally shut down.


Unix went from AT&T to Novell to SCO.

Aha! That was what I was trying to remember. :-) Weren't they
at first a networking company for PCs?

SCO was originally formed to market and support Microsoft Xenix.
There were several large parties, when SCO disappeared.

Indeed so. :-)

In the meanwhile, linux was started by Linus Thorvalds, which
was written from scratch to work like unix, but to not have a single
line of AT&T copyrighted code init. (He may have started from another
minimal unix kernel written by someone to use as a tool for teaching OS
programming -- called Minux (or was that Minix?).

Minix.

Thanks!

Linux got hit by the
SCO lawsuit along with anything else unix like.

The oldest examples I have of the various ones is v7 unix on
a Motorola MC68000 CPU, BSD 4.2 on a National Semiconductor CPU and made
by Tektronix, and SysVr2 on an AT&T Unix-PC/7300/3B1 (again Motorola
MC68010 this time.)

The Unix-PC, was made by Convergent Technology.

Yes -- but sold by AT&T -- unlike the MiniFrame which Convergent
sold under their own name. (68020 IIRC, instead of the 68010 in the
Unix-PC.

Thanks,
DoN.

--
Remove oil spill source from e-mail
Email: | Voice (all times): (703) 938-4564
(too) near Washington D.C. | http://www.d-and-d.com/dnichols/DoN.html
--- Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero ---

"SMS" wrote in message
...
On 12/28/2011 9:10 AM, Bob La Londe wrote:
"Existential Angst" wrote in message
...
"The Daring Dufas" wrote in message
...
On 12/27/2011 10:58 PM, oldyork90 wrote:
I'm reading bad news about Sears/KMart. If Sears goes tits up, I hope
they hand off the Craftsman line. I always had good luck with their
hand tools.

Don't worry, some Chinese holding company will buy them out. The new
stores will be Shears and Claymart. ^_^

Or, equivalently, HF will expand.....

I could be wrong, but I doubt it. The profit taking that resulted in
their lower selection and greater number of listed items out of stock
doesn't leave them in much of a position to pick up market share.
Wal-Mart will likely continue to expand though.

HF is expanding like crazy.


That's why their selection is crap compared to a couple years ago, and more
and more things are listed as out of stock?