On Fri, 01 Apr 2016 21:11:56 +0100, Vir Campestris wrote:

On 29/03/2016 14:24, John Rumm wrote:
FAT was basically just a formalisation of what was inherited from
CP/M... it was not until MS hired a patent lawyer with the intention of
finding new way to monetise old intellectual property, that FAT was
even really acknowledged as being an item rather than just a bit of
technology that loads of people used. It main goal was simplicity and
lightweight implementation - as was demanded by the needs of the time.

This turns out not to be the case.

CP/M discs had a set of directory entries for the files. Each entry had
a few (8?) clusters described in it; if the file was big it had multiple
directory entries.

AFAICR, these 'extra' directory entries (CP/M 2.2) were known as
'extents'. As a method of keeping track of sectors (floppy disk storage)
used by a file, it just seemed overly 'clunky' and inefficient (however,
it did seem to offer some resilience against errors which may have been
mandated by the lack of a duplicate directory structure - at least I
can't recall any mention of duplication of this vital FS metadata).

I guess the standard 16(?) sectors or allocation units/clusters (It must
be over 3 decades ago when I last tried to study this stuff) per
directory entry was ample to allocate all of a floppy disk's storage
space to the maximum number of file entries (64?) such that they could
'waste' a directory entry slot or 3 for use as extents for larger files
which would reduce the number of files that could be stored anyway.


One of the boot up tasks for CP/M was to read all the entries, and build
a free space bitmap in memory. No need for chkdsk to find lost bits.

I never delved into CP/M 2.2 that deeply but that does seem a logical
task. However, I rather doubt it was to eliminate the need for a CHKDSK
like utility, so much as a way of speeding up write operations into free
space.

--
Johnny B Good

On 01/04/2016 21:17, Vir Campestris wrote:
On 30/03/2016 00:09, Tim Streater wrote:

Meaning you couldn't have more than one file of a particular name?

No.

Both VME operating systems had the same treed folder structure. To a
user it looks like Unix file systems.

Andy

But Unix file systems start with a drive identifier, don't they? Whereas
VME starts with user.

(Started on VME/K! I guess 1900 beats that?)

--
Rod

On 02/04/16 08:46, polygonum wrote:
On 01/04/2016 21:17, Vir Campestris wrote:
On 30/03/2016 00:09, Tim Streater wrote:

Meaning you couldn't have more than one file of a particular name?

No.

Both VME operating systems had the same treed folder structure. To a
user it looks like Unix file systems.

Andy

But Unix file systems start with a drive identifier, don't they?

No.


Whereas
VME starts with user.

(Started on VME/K! I guess 1900 beats that?)



--
To ban Christmas, simply give turkeys the vote.

On 02/04/16 11:45, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , Huge
wrote:

On 2016-04-01, polygonum wrote:
On 30/03/2016 12:43, John Rumm wrote:

VMS also used a file generation counter - so if you edited and saved
myfile.pas it would be myfile.pas;1, then each successive edit would
increment the version. Hence you could wither leave the version off the
file and get the latest, or specify any previous version explicitly.

Very, very handy!

So much so that I'm astonished the idea seems to have vanished into the
mists of time. All this ".bak" nonsense is rubbish.

As are file extensions, although we seem to be stuck with them.

File extensions are useful metadata, and if you don't have them the
operating system has to create some other way of storing that metadata
(like Apple Macs do) or do without some of the ability to recognise what
sort of file it is and 'do the right thing' with it rather than always
asking.


--
Ideas are more powerful than guns. We would not let our enemies have
guns, why should we let them have ideas?

Josef Stalin

On 02/04/16 12:50, Huge wrote:
On 2016-04-02, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , Huge
wrote:

On 2016-04-01, polygonum wrote:
On 30/03/2016 12:43, John Rumm wrote:

VMS also used a file generation counter - so if you edited and saved
myfile.pas it would be myfile.pas;1, then each successive edit would
increment the version. Hence you could wither leave the version off the
file and get the latest, or specify any previous version explicitly.

Very, very handy!

So much so that I'm astonished the idea seems to have vanished into the
mists of time. All this ".bak" nonsense is rubbish.

As are file extensions,

Indeed. And drive letters.

although we seem to be stuck with them.

Sadly.


Drive letters go back to the original INTEL development stations from
which CP/M was evolved.


They made sense when the user was responsible for inserting the floppies.

Mainframe OS never had them, as mounting a drive was an administrative
task and not something you would ever let a mere user do.

Once again the legacy of windows as descended from a single user
microprocessor env. shows.

--
€œSome people like to travel by train because it combines the slowness of
a car with the cramped public exposure of €¨an airplane.€�

Dennis Miller

On 02/04/16 13:12, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

On 02/04/16 11:45, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , Huge
wrote:

On 2016-04-01, polygonum wrote:
On 30/03/2016 12:43, John Rumm wrote:

VMS also used a file generation counter - so if you edited and saved
myfile.pas it would be myfile.pas;1, then each successive edit would
increment the version. Hence you could wither leave the version
off the
file and get the latest, or specify any previous version explicitly.

Very, very handy!

So much so that I'm astonished the idea seems to have vanished into the
mists of time. All this ".bak" nonsense is rubbish.

As are file extensions, although we seem to be stuck with them.

File extensions are useful metadata, and if you don't have them the
operating system has to create some other way of storing that metadata
(like Apple Macs do) or do without some of the ability to recognise
what sort of file it is and 'do the right thing' with it rather than
always asking.

Agreed that it's useful, but unfortunately Apple has largely gone away
from that scheme. I couldn't really say what they do now. What's really
needed is a proper agreement about how to store metadata with a file.
Adding it to the filename doesn't really scale.

well legacy etc etc


The problem is, if you have the metadata in a separate file (apple),
when you download, both ends need to be aware of that and send the metadata.

The better way as many image files do, is to pack it in the start of the
file itself.

So it works pretty well with audio video and picture data.

Which are come latelies to the file type game.

Times change...and legacy persists.


--
Bureaucracy defends the status quo long past the time the quo has lost
its status.

Laurence Peter

On 02/04/16 13:08, Tim Streater wrote:
On OS X the only place you see a drive is either under "About this
Mac", which tells you all about your hardware and software, or in Disk
Utility, where you check on the state of things and make partitions.

Well MACs run *nix under the hood.

Actually I think you will find that OS/X does actually by default show
'mounted volumes' on the desk top as icons.

Linux usually does, and they often appear in the file manager as well.

Thats handing when you are plugging and unplugging USB drives



--
Truth welcomes investigation because truth knows investigation will lead
to converts. It is deception that uses all the other techniques.

On 02/04/16 14:17, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

On 02/04/16 13:08, Tim Streater wrote:
On OS X the only place you see a drive is either under "About this
Mac", which tells you all about your hardware and software, or in Disk
Utility, where you check on the state of things and make partitions.

Well Macs run *nix under the hood.

Actually I think you will find that OS/X does actually by default show
'mounted volumes' on the desk top as icons.

Not by default, but I always show them as I want to see what I've got
mounted. And then it's easy to access them - just double-click. But as
you say, that's *volumes*, not *devices*.


Well volume is just OSX name for 'mountable partition' ..

Not even sure what Linux calls em.

Sometimes 'Devices' sometimes 'volumes'


Linux usually does, and they often appear in the file manager as well.

What's a file manager?

Oh, its the box on a gui system that lists all the files in directories
and stuff. I think its called by the patronisingly naive name 'finder'
or 'chooser' in OSX, IIRC.



Thats handy when you are plugging and unplugging USB drives

Yes, and here they will show up on the Desktop when plugged in, and
disappear when ejected. Even this morning's floppy did that (I've had
the USB floppy drive more than 10 years and used it perhaps five
times).


Well of course, if you want to access files they have to be in a mounted
file system (volume).

So of course its going to be treated like that. Even A CDROM in a drive
shows like that.


--
"Anyone who believes that the laws of physics are mere social
conventions is invited to try transgressing those conventions from the
windows of my apartment. (I live on the twenty-first floor.) "

Alan Sokal

On 02/04/2016 14:17, Tim Streater wrote:

Linux usually does, and they often appear in the file manager as well.

What's a file manager?

Its a GUI that linux users use to look more like and work more like the
windows they hate.

On 02/04/16 17:16, dennis@home wrote:
On 02/04/2016 14:17, Tim Streater wrote:

Linux usually does, and they often appear in the file manager as well.

What's a file manager?

Its a GUI that linux users use to look more like and work more like the
windows they hate.


No, dennis, it isn't.

Its an application.


--
"What do you think about Gay Marriage?"
"I don't."
"Don't what?"
"Think about Gay Marriage."

On 02/04/16 17:40, Tim Streater wrote:
In article . com,
dennis@home wrote:

On 02/04/2016 14:17, Tim Streater wrote:

Linux usually does, and they often appear in the file manager as well.

What's a file manager?

Its a GUI that linux users use to look more like and work more like
the windows they hate.

Well, I've never understood why you folks, already running a file
manager, then proceed to start another copy.

I'm on the phone to the Helpdesk, they say go to the Start menu and
choose FileManager, then navigate to that drive and open it.

What a palaver.

Me, I just double-click the icon for that volume that's already on the
Desktop. Simples.


Er. and what do you thing that does? It opens a file manager. Known as
'Finder' if its Mac OSX

By the way, that also works in Linux

You can click on a directory that's linked to from the desktop, on a
volume that's shown as mounted on the desktop, You can even set up
special files that when clicked on, on the desktop will open anything,
start any program or run a complete scripts to blow up a nuclear powers
station and discredit the CIA.

The difference between Linux and operating systems for idiots, is that
whilst there a may be way of doing stuff that the initial installation
defaults to it isn't the only way and you can customise things to work
the way you want.

Unlike Windows and Macs where you pretty much get to do things the way
they decide you shall, and that's that.

--
"What do you think about Gay Marriage?"
"I don't."
"Don't what?"
"Think about Gay Marriage."

On 02/04/16 18:48, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

On 02/04/16 17:40, Tim Streater wrote:
In article . com,
dennis@home wrote:

On 02/04/2016 14:17, Tim Streater wrote:

Linux usually does, and they often appear in the file manager as
well.

What's a file manager?

Its a GUI that linux users use to look more like and work more like
the windows they hate.

Well, I've never understood why you folks, already running a file
manager, then proceed to start another copy.

I'm on the phone to the Helpdesk, they say go to the Start menu and
choose FileManager, then navigate to that drive and open it.

What a palaver.

Me, I just double-click the icon for that volume that's already on the
Desktop. Simples.


Er. and what do you thing that does? It opens a file manager. Known as
'Finder' if its Mac OSX

No it doesn't. It opens a window showing the files on that volume. A
Finder window. The Finder is already running.


How do you know the finder is already running?

Unlike Windows and Macs where you pretty much get to do things the way
they decide you shall, and that's that.

Wrong again. The desktops on the three platforms look similar in many
respects. I already told you I choose to have volumes showing as icons
on the Desktop (not the default). Apart that is from some irritations
such as that the content of windows shown by the Mint FM don't seem to
update live if e.g. you go into a Terminal session and delete some
files behind the back of the FM.

It does eventually.

And on Windows you get told off if you
try to move a file that's open. OS X kicks applications up the bum when
a file is moved, and they all knuckle forehead and update where they
think a file is or the list of files displayed.

Designed, IOW, so I can do what I want and not what the OS graciously
allows me to do.

Linux allows you do do what you want, it just doesn't try as hard to
protect you from the consequences of your actions.


--
"The great thing about Glasgow is that if there's a nuclear attack it'll
look exactly the same afterwards."

Billy Connolly

On Sat, 2 Apr 2016 17:50:13 +0100, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

snip

The difference between Linux and operating systems for idiots,

Strange that the likes of Ubuntu and Mint are specifically trying to
appeal to the people you refer to as 'idiots'.

is that
whilst there a may be way of doing stuff that the initial installation
defaults to it isn't the only way and you can customise things to work
the way you want.

You can, yes, however, outside the desktop background picture I doubt
many people ever change anything at all. By 'many people' I'm talking
about 'ordinary users' for example, the core users of most OS's,
including Linux (especially the distros targeting such users).

Unlike Windows and Macs where you pretty much get to do things the way
they decide you shall, and that's that.

And that's fine for 'most people'. That means the designers have done
their job well.

Sounds like you know as much about the current desktop OS demographic
as you know about OSX and Windows! ;-(


Cheers, T i m

On 02/04/16 22:06, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

On 02/04/16 18:48, Tim Streater wrote:

No it doesn't. It opens a window showing the files on that volume. A
Finder window. The Finder is already running.

How do you know the finder is already running?

It's always running, although there are ways to quit it. It's
straightforward to relaunch it if desired.

I repeat, how do you KNOW its always running?

Rather than just appearing to be running?


--
Karl Marx said religion is the opium of the people.
But Marxism is the crack cocaine.

On 02/04/2016 11:41, Huge wrote:
On 2016-04-01, polygonum wrote:
On 30/03/2016 12:43, John Rumm wrote:

VMS also used a file generation counter - so if you edited and saved
myfile.pas it would be myfile.pas;1, then each successive edit would
increment the version. Hence you could wither leave the version off the
file and get the latest, or specify any previous version explicitly.

Very, very handy!

So much so that I'm astonished the idea seems to have vanished into the
mists of time. All this ".bak" nonsense is rubbish.


Funnily enough, if you download and then re-download a file in Windows,
the second one gets (1) in its name just before the file extension. Do
it again and you see (2), and so on. So in at least that context, it
seems to have had a slight resurrection.

--
Rod

On 02/04/16 22:54, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

On 02/04/16 22:06, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

On 02/04/16 18:48, Tim Streater wrote:

No it doesn't. It opens a window showing the files on that volume. A
Finder window. The Finder is already running.

How do you know the finder is already running?

It's always running, although there are ways to quit it. It's
straightforward to relaunch it if desired.

I repeat, how do you KNOW its always running?

Rather than just appearing to be running?

1) It wouldn't be marked as running in the Duck.

2) All the volume and file icons on my Desktop would vanish.

3) And I can look in Activity Monitor and see it running.

The only one that actually proves it is 3.



--
All political activity makes complete sense once the proposition that
all government is basically a self-legalising protection racket, is
fully understood.

On 02/04/16 22:58, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

On 02/04/16 22:54, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

On 02/04/16 22:06, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

On 02/04/16 18:48, Tim Streater wrote:

No it doesn't. It opens a window showing the files on that volume. A
Finder window. The Finder is already running.

How do you know the finder is already running?

It's always running, although there are ways to quit it. It's
straightforward to relaunch it if desired.

I repeat, how do you KNOW its always running?

Rather than just appearing to be running?

1) It wouldn't be marked as running in the Duck.

2) All the volume and file icons on my Desktop would vanish.

3) And I can look in Activity Monitor and see it running.

The only one that actually proves it is 3.

While I agree that (1) could be faked, if I relaunch the Finder the
running marker goes off and (2) happens. Now, what would be the point
of faking all that?

With apple, fake is the name of the game.

Incidentally, with linux, the icons don't disappear and reappear,

--
€œSome people like to travel by train because it combines the slowness of
a car with the cramped public exposure of €¨an airplane.€�

Dennis Miller

On 02/04/16 23:14, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

On 02/04/16 22:58, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

On 02/04/16 22:54, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

On 02/04/16 22:06, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

On 02/04/16 18:48, Tim Streater wrote:

No it doesn't. It opens a window showing the files on that
volume. A
Finder window. The Finder is already running.

How do you know the finder is already running?

It's always running, although there are ways to quit it. It's
straightforward to relaunch it if desired.

I repeat, how do you KNOW its always running?

Rather than just appearing to be running?

1) It wouldn't be marked as running in the Duck.

2) All the volume and file icons on my Desktop would vanish.

3) And I can look in Activity Monitor and see it running.

The only one that actually proves it is 3.

While I agree that (1) could be faked, if I relaunch the Finder the
running marker goes off and (2) happens. Now, what would be the point
of faking all that?

With apple, fake is the name of the game.

Incidentally, with linux, the icons don't disappear and reappear,

Since I'm restarting the Finder once a year or less, I really don't
care. In fact, it's a useful indicator that I *have* restarted the
Finder. What is much more to the point is that the Finder (and other
apps) keep themselves updated. That Linux and Win don't do that, and
require a refresh button on their Finder window equivalents, I find
primitive.


Hahah. I've broken finder easily enough with network mounted volumes.




--
Bureaucracy defends the status quo long past the time the quo has lost
its status.

Laurence Peter

On 02/04/2016 17:38, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 02/04/16 17:16, dennis@home wrote:
On 02/04/2016 14:17, Tim Streater wrote:

Linux usually does, and they often appear in the file manager as well.

What's a file manager?

Its a GUI that linux users use to look more like and work more like the
windows they hate.


No, dennis, it isn't.

Its an application.



Yes dear, as are all the other things a user runs.

On 02/04/2016 18:48, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

On 02/04/16 17:40, Tim Streater wrote:
In article . com,
dennis@home wrote:

On 02/04/2016 14:17, Tim Streater wrote:

Linux usually does, and they often appear in the file manager as
well.

What's a file manager?

Its a GUI that linux users use to look more like and work more like
the windows they hate.

Well, I've never understood why you folks, already running a file
manager, then proceed to start another copy.

I'm on the phone to the Helpdesk, they say go to the Start menu and
choose FileManager, then navigate to that drive and open it.

What a palaver.

Me, I just double-click the icon for that volume that's already on the
Desktop. Simples.


Er. and what do you thing that does? It opens a file manager. Known as
'Finder' if its Mac OSX

No it doesn't. It opens a window showing the files on that volume. A
Finder window. The Finder is already running.

Unlike Windows and Macs where you pretty much get to do things the way
they decide you shall, and that's that.

Wrong again. The desktops on the three platforms look similar in many
respects. I already told you I choose to have volumes showing as icons
on the Desktop (not the default). Apart that is from some irritations
such as that the content of windows shown by the Mint FM don't seem to
update live if e.g. you go into a Terminal session and delete some
files behind the back of the FM. And on Windows you get told off if you
try to move a file that's open.

Hmm?
It doesn't do that here.
it is quite happy to let you move/rename files that are open in an
application.

The application then decides what it should do.
There may well be something the application can set to determine the
behaviour but as I don't have the API manual to hand I don't know.

OS X kicks applications up the bum when
a file is moved, and they all knuckle forehead and update where they
think a file is or the list of files displayed.

Designed, IOW, so I can do what I want and not what the OS graciously
allows me to do.


Designed to let you do what the designer decided to let you do, just
like any other OS/application.

On 01/04/2016 10:34, whisky-dave wrote:
On Thursday, 31 March 2016 22:04:35 UTC+1, Rod Speed wrote:
whisky-dave wrote
Rod Speed wrote
whisky-dave wrote
Rod Speed wrote
whisky-dave wrote
Rod Speed wrote
whisky-dave wrote

So what did you do.

I had to have pros in as I don't own scaffolding and
I doubt I could put it up by myself, otherwise the
scaffolding company wouldn;t be employing 3 people
to do it but would just employ one person wouldn't they ?

Just because its more efficient to have 3 people do it when
you are doing it professionally doesn't mean that you can't
do it yourself when you don't care about how long it takes.

Yes I know, but I didn't have the tools to do it

Cost a lot less to buy them than to pay someone else to do it all.

No it doesn't

Corse it does with scaffolding. You need **** all
tools, just a spanner or a ratchet handle and socket.

But you also need the scafolding and the ladders don't you.
These don't normally grow on trees or appear out of thin air.

That was discussing your stupid claims
about the number of men and tools.

What stupid claims, that you sometimes need two people when doing contruction type jobs.....
I wonder why they employed more than one person to build the pyramids,
seems strange doesn't it.


If you buy the scaffolding and ladders used and flog them
once the job is done, that costs you nothing except your time.


And assume space needed for storage. Buying/selling scaffolding for DIY
strikes me a perfectly sensible option

Time is money for most,

Obviously depends on the individual. I often don't think in terms of
money saved with DIY.

do you buy the lorry to transport them too.

Have it delivered, and collected when you're done? Can't think why I
commented on that Q . . . ;-)


--
Cheers, Rob

On 02/04/2016 17:40, Tim Streater wrote:
In article . com,
dennis@home wrote:

On 02/04/2016 14:17, Tim Streater wrote:

Linux usually does, and they often appear in the file manager as well.

What's a file manager?

Its a GUI that linux users use to look more like and work more like
the windows they hate.

Well, I've never understood why you folks, already running a file
manager, then proceed to start another copy.

I'm on the phone to the Helpdesk, they say go to the Start menu and
choose FileManager, then navigate to that drive and open it.

What a palaver.

Me, I just double-click the icon for that volume that's already on the
Desktop. Simples.


I have it on the task bar so I just need a single click.

On 03/04/16 11:55, dennis@home wrote:
On 02/04/2016 17:40, Tim Streater wrote:
In article . com,
dennis@home wrote:

On 02/04/2016 14:17, Tim Streater wrote:

Linux usually does, and they often appear in the file manager as well.

What's a file manager?

Its a GUI that linux users use to look more like and work more like
the windows they hate.

Well, I've never understood why you folks, already running a file
manager, then proceed to start another copy.

I'm on the phone to the Helpdesk, they say go to the Start menu and
choose FileManager, then navigate to that drive and open it.

What a palaver.

Me, I just double-click the icon for that volume that's already on the
Desktop. Simples.


I have it on the task bar so I just need a single click.

I have it ion the desktop so a single click. Or a diouble click.
Depending oin how I want to set it up.

Of course the point of having TWO file managers running with different
widows for each, is to look into two directory trees side by side, so
you can copy between them easily for example by dragging and dropping..

--
New Socialism consists essentially in being seen to have your heart in
the right place whilst your head is in the clouds and your hand is in
someone else's pocket.

On Sun, 3 Apr 2016 12:04:55 +0100, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

snip

Of course the point of having TWO file managers running with different
widows for each, is to look into two directory trees side by side, so
you can copy between them easily for example by dragging and dropping..

Windows + E twice then right click on the taskbar and 'Tile Windows
Vertically'.

Cheers, T i m

On 03/04/2016 12:04, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 03/04/16 11:55, dennis@home wrote:
On 02/04/2016 17:40, Tim Streater wrote:
In article . com,
dennis@home wrote:

On 02/04/2016 14:17, Tim Streater wrote:

Linux usually does, and they often appear in the file manager as
well.

What's a file manager?

Its a GUI that linux users use to look more like and work more like
the windows they hate.

Well, I've never understood why you folks, already running a file
manager, then proceed to start another copy.

I'm on the phone to the Helpdesk, they say go to the Start menu and
choose FileManager, then navigate to that drive and open it.

What a palaver.

Me, I just double-click the icon for that volume that's already on the
Desktop. Simples.


I have it on the task bar so I just need a single click.

I have it ion the desktop so a single click. Or a diouble click.
Depending oin how I want to set it up.

Of course the point of having TWO file managers running with different
widows for each, is to look into two directory trees side by side, so
you can copy between them easily for example by dragging and dropping..


Well that's stating the obvious?

On 03/04/16 13:17, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

Of course the point of having TWO file managers running with different
widows for each, is to look into two directory trees side by side, so
you can copy between them easily for example by dragging and dropping..

You don't need two file managers running to do that. An application
(Finder in my instance) can have, like, y'know, *more* than just the
one window open at a time.

Well yes.

But its pretty moot these days whether its one or two, since the
libraries are all shared and you need two windows with RAM overhead, and
they will be separate tasks..


--
All political activity makes complete sense once the proposition that
all government is basically a self-legalising protection racket, is
fully understood.

On Friday, 1 April 2016 18:46:32 UTC+1, Rod Speed wrote:


that you sometimes need two people when doing contruction type jobs.....

Not with the scaffolding being discussed and when you do paying
someone to do the work isnt the only alternative anyway.

Of course not there's lots of options slavery being just one.
Qatar has found other ways too.


If you buy the scaffolding and ladders used and flog them
once the job is done, that costs you nothing except your time.

Time is money for most,

Not with DIY it isnt.

Yes it is.
Well except for the brainless of course.

You spend quite a time making bread and alcohol don't you well we both know that man can not live by bread alone.

For most people there are 24 hours in the day to divide up into what we do.
If yuo spend you're time scaffolding where they time for love i.e sheep shagging, food knocking back your grog.




Starnge that the majority of building contractors
don;t use the method you suggest I wonder why.

What makes sense for a building contractor
is irrelevant to what makes sense for DIY.

Why don't they ahve to both get the job done ?


And since this is the best you can manage, here
goes the chain on the rest of your even sillier ****.

we've eveloved to be able to us push buttoms and even gesture control,
we don;t all need to yank on a chain to flush our ****.

On Friday, 1 April 2016 19:39:18 UTC+1, Rod Speed wrote:
whisky-dave wrote

Doesn't happen when fixing your own microwave at home.

depends what you mean by fixing doesn't it.

Nope.

Yep.


So how do you test a HV microwave diode,

If it looks like it likely is the problem,

What does a none working microwave diode look like, are you sure a working or non-working one will look like.

you replace it
and see if that fixes the problem.

How do yuo replace it where do you buy it from ?

Even someone as
stupid as you should be able to work that one out
if someone was actually stupid enough to lend you
a seeing eye dog and a white cane.

****wit, I doubt you could visually tell a working diode from a non-working one
and how will you know is the diode and not the transformer or the inbuilt fuse.


That is how I operated at work.

you have/had A JOB ?

whisky-dave wrote
Rod Speed wrote
whisky-dave wrote

that you sometimes need two people when doing contruction type jobs.....

Not with the scaffolding being discussed and when you do, paying
someone to do the work isnt the only alternative anyway.

Of course not there's lots of options slavery being just one.
Qatar has found other ways too.

And even someone as stupid as you could get a mate to
give you a hand and give him a hand when he needs more
than one person to do something too. If you actually had any.

If you buy the scaffolding and ladders used and flog them
once the job is done, that costs you nothing except your time.

Time is money for most,

Not with DIY it isnt.

Yes it is.

Even sillier and more pig ignorant than you usually manage.

reams of your even sillier **** flushed where it belongs

Starnge that the majority of building contractors
don;t use the method you suggest I wonder why.

What makes sense for a building contractor
is irrelevant to what makes sense for DIY.

Why don't they ahve to both get the job done ?

Irrelevant to what makes sense as far
as how to get the job done is concerned.

And since this is the best you can manage, here
goes the chain on the rest of your even sillier ****.

Some terminal drunken ****wit desperately cowering behind
whisky-dave wrote just the mindless
drunken silly **** you'd expect from a desperately cowering
drunk terminal ****wit.

On Monday, 4 April 2016 11:15:15 UTC+1, Rod Speed wrote:
whisky-dave wrote
Rod Speed wrote
whisky-dave wrote

that you sometimes need two people when doing contruction type jobs.....

Not with the scaffolding being discussed and when you do, paying
someone to do the work isnt the only alternative anyway.

Of course not there's lots of options slavery being just one.
Qatar has found other ways too.

And even someone as stupid as you could get a mate to
give you a hand and give him a hand when he needs more
than one person to do something too. If you actually had any.

I have plenty but the vast majority all have jobs of work to do.
We help each other out in a free time but we find peole that are willing to employ us for real money, pity you and you're mates aren't in that situation.

Anyway I thought your best options was to employ kids on no pay.



If you buy the scaffolding and ladders used and flog them
once the job is done, that costs you nothing except your time.

Time is money for most,

Not with DIY it isnt.

Yes it is.

Even sillier and more pig ignorant than you usually manage.

When I wanted a mac computer made I let Aple do it for me I let someone ship it too me too, only brain dead idiot like yuorself would claim you could build one yourself cheaper.

reams of your even sillier **** flushed where it belongs

whisky-dave wrote
Rod Speed wrote
whisky-dave wrote
Rod Speed wrote
whisky-dave wrote

that you sometimes need two people when doing contruction type
jobs.....

Not with the scaffolding being discussed and when you do, paying
someone to do the work isnt the only alternative anyway.

Of course not there's lots of options slavery being just one.
Qatar has found other ways too.

And even someone as stupid as you could get a mate to
give you a hand and give him a hand when he needs more
than one person to do something too. If you actually had any.

I have plenty but the vast majority all have jobs of work to do.

None of them work all the time.

We help each other out in a free time

So you don't need to pay anyone to do what you can DIY, stupid.

Anyway I thought your best options was to employ kids on no pay.

Those are useless for most stuff.

If you buy the scaffolding and ladders used and flog them
once the job is done, that costs you nothing except your time.

Time is money for most,

Not with DIY it isnt.

Yes it is.

Even sillier and more pig ignorant than you usually manage.

When I wanted a mac computer made I let Aple
do it for me I let someone ship it too me too,

More fool you.

only brain dead idiot like yuorself would
claim you could build one yourself cheaper.

I do in fact build them much cheaper than that steaming
turd of yours cost you and they are much better too.

On 01/04/2016 21:54, T i m wrote:
On Fri, 1 Apr 2016 21:09:38 +0100, Vir Campestris
wrote:

On 29/03/2016 00:52, T i m wrote:
(From memory and basically ...)

Or something like that, it's been a while.;-)

It has been a while :P

The MFT is the thing on the front of the disc that tells you where all
the partitions are.
I thought that was the 'partition table' Andy?

You're right. It has been a while.

Now how come I can remember CP/M?

Andy

On 02/04/2016 02:59, Johnny B Good wrote:
AFAICR, these 'extra' directory entries (CP/M 2.2) were known as
'extents'. As a method of keeping track of sectors (floppy disk storage)
used by a file, it just seemed overly 'clunky' and inefficient (however,
it did seem to offer some resilience against errors which may have been
mandated by the lack of a duplicate directory structure - at least I
can't recall any mention of duplication of this vital FS metadata).

I guess the standard 16(?) sectors or allocation units/clusters (It must
be over 3 decades ago when I last tried to study this stuff) per
directory entry was ample to allocate all of a floppy disk's storage
space to the maximum number of file entries (64?) such that they could
'waste' a directory entry slot or 3 for use as extents for larger files
which would reduce the number of files that could be stored anyway.

I've this vague memory that we had to tune the cluster size (and I think
you're right, that's a DOS term) because the directory had a maximum
size in clusters, and you didn't want to ever run out of directory entries.

There was IIRC no redundancy. But at least you could, unlike with FAT,
have sparse files. Just leave some of the entries blank, and a read
would give you zeroes.

(I've got the source code for the disk test/format program on the old
'286 machine out in my shed/study. I must run it up again and see what
it says. I also have the manuals, but I don't have room to unpack them.
I really must get on with building a proper garage/shed/workshop. It's
in the budget, I just don't seem to have the time.)

Andy

On 03/04/2016 12:04, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Of course the point of having TWO file managers running with different
widows for each
^^^^^^

Is that anything to do with orphaned files :}

Andy

On Mon, 4 Apr 2016 21:13:47 +0100, Vir Campestris
wrote:

On 01/04/2016 21:54, T i m wrote:
On Fri, 1 Apr 2016 21:09:38 +0100, Vir Campestris
wrote:

On 29/03/2016 00:52, T i m wrote:
(From memory and basically ...)

Or something like that, it's been a while.;-)

It has been a while :P

The MFT is the thing on the front of the disc that tells you where all
the partitions are.
I thought that was the 'partition table' Andy?

You're right. It has been a while.

If it wasn't that the basics of all this were parts of the MS, Novell
and A+ courses I presented on a fairly regular basis (for 7 years), I
wouldn't remember any of it either. ;-)

Now how come I can remember CP/M?

All I can remember from that is 'pip'?

How can I remember most of the settings in autoexec.bat and config.sys
but haven't touched either in a very long time? ;-)

I think it's all part of both repetition (at the time) and ones long
term memory suffering less than short term (as you get older)?

FWIW, a basic analogy I used for comparing FAT with the MFT of NTFS
went like this.

If you went to a 'FAT' library and asked for information on a subject
they would give you a reference to that information and that in turn
would reference the next bit of information on that same subject.

In an MFT library the same request would result to not only *all* the
pointers to all the information on that subject, you would also be
given the smaller bits of information itself (not just the pointers to
it).

So, if a reference was missing in the FAT library you probably would
lose access to all the parts that followed.

Lose access to one bit in a MFT library and you just lost access to
that bit ...

Or something like that. ;-)

Cheers, T i m

On 04/04/16 21:13, Vir Campestris wrote:
On 01/04/2016 21:54, T i m wrote:
On Fri, 1 Apr 2016 21:09:38 +0100, Vir Campestris
wrote:

On 29/03/2016 00:52, T i m wrote:
(From memory and basically ...)

Or something like that, it's been a while.;-)

It has been a while :P

The MFT is the thing on the front of the disc that tells you where all
the partitions are.
I thought that was the 'partition table' Andy?

You're right. It has been a while.

Now how come I can remember CP/M?


CP/M was one of the two file systems I actually wrote drive software for..

The other was DOS...

Andy


--
Bureaucracy defends the status quo long past the time the quo has lost
its status.

Laurence Peter

On Monday, 4 April 2016 20:07:45 UTC+1, Rod Speed wrote:
whisky-dave wrote
Rod Speed wrote
whisky-dave wrote
Rod Speed wrote
whisky-dave wrote

that you sometimes need two people when doing contruction type
jobs.....

Not with the scaffolding being discussed and when you do, paying
someone to do the work isnt the only alternative anyway.

Of course not there's lots of options slavery being just one.
Qatar has found other ways too.

And even someone as stupid as you could get a mate to
give you a hand and give him a hand when he needs more
than one person to do something too. If you actually had any.

I have plenty but the vast majority all have jobs of work to do.

None of them work all the time.

None of use do, why becuase humans require sleep and food, and leasure or downtime.


We help each other out in a free time

So you don't need to pay anyone to do what you can DIY, stupid.

We all have a certain amount of time to live for some it's more presious to us
than others.
Just because you insist littel kids paint your house for you .....

Anyway I thought your best options was to employ kids on no pay.

Those are useless for most stuff.

So yuo don't use them to put rooves on or install windows.



When I wanted a mac computer made I let Aple
do it for me I let someone ship it too me too,

More fool you.

I wouldn't employ you would I, and no one else would either.


only brain dead idiot like yuorself would
claim you could build one yourself cheaper.

I do in fact build them much cheaper than that steaming
turd of yours cost you and they are much better too.

yeah sure.
So where can yuo buy a 5K monitor then ?
Lets see if you can build anything other than tall story filled with lies.

En el artículo , Vir
Campestris escribió:

The MFT is the thing on the front of the disc that tells you where all
the partitions are.

Are you sure you don't mean the partition table?

And the MBR is the master boot record - the first sector of the disk.

--
(\_/)
(='.'=) Windows 10: less of an OS, more of a drive-by mugging.
(")_(") -- "Esme" on el Reg

On Tuesday, 5 April 2016 15:52:50 UTC+1, Mike Tomlinson wrote:
En el artículo , Vir
Campestris escribió:

The MFT is the thing on the front of the disc that tells you where all
the partitions are.

Are you sure you don't mean the partition table?

And the MBR is the master boot record - the first sector of the disk.

and MTBF which tell you how long before it'll fail. (on average of course)




--
(\_/)
(='.'=) Windows 10: less of an OS, more of a drive-by mugging.
(")_(") -- "Esme" on el Reg