beware of the updates you install

[dave]

On 11/07/2013 12:17 PM, William Sommerwerck wrote:

"geoff" wrote in message
news:qKidnYIY-aahbubPnZ2dnUVZ_rCdnZ2d@giganews.com...

I'm sure if OP had let things do themselves without interference he
wouldn't
had had the slight 15 minute inconvenience that he he. Hardly a reason to
ditch an OS and all the applications he knows and loves ....

See the newer posting in which I claim that the installation appeared to
have completed.

Windows mocks the user incessantly. It is the Trabant of operating systems.

 

[hank alrich]

sctvguy1 <sctvguy1@invalid.net> wrote:

On Thu, 07 Nov 2013 12:01:57 -0800, William Sommerwerck wrote:

"sctvguy1" wrote in message news:l5gp4p$9m8$2@dont-email.me...

I dropped Windows years ago. Run Linux. No problems.

Does Linux run Word? Ventura? Photoshop? Interface with my AIBO? LEGOs?
Canon and Epson scanners?

Over the years, I have had little trouble with Windows. Contrary to what
some people might think, it is not scarier than blueberry pancakes.

I run Libre/Open Office which has the same functions as Word, and the
same basic interfaces. Also, imports Word documents and reads them.
Same for the other parts of the Microsoft Office suite.
As for Photoshop, there is GIMP, a clone for Linux that is FREE. It has
the same power as Photoshop.

That is disupted by several excellent photogs I know, though they say
it's close.

One has said this is fully equivalent:

http://www.pl32.com/

I've been using it buy needs, and skills, are paltry. It is much easier
for a non-geek to manage that is GIMP, which I used for several years
before finding Photoline.

As for laser/inkjet printers, no real problems. I have run HP and am
presently running Brother laser printers(HL-1440). I also run Canon LiDE
20 and 35 scanners, no problems.
Just pick a linux distro from someplace like distrowatch.com, burn it to
DVD or CD, and run it live, see if it works for you.

--
shut up and play your guitar * HankAlrich.Com
HankandShaidriMusic.Com
YouTube.Com/WalkinayMusic

 

[geoff]

sctvguy1 wrote:

On Fri, 08 Nov 2013 09:12:09 +1300, geoff wrote:

sctvguy1 wrote:

I dropped Windows years ago. Run Linux. No problems.

I'm sure if OP had let things do themselves without interference he
wouldn't had had the slight 15 minute inconvenience that he he.
Hardly a reason to ditch an OS and all the applications he knows and
loves ....

geoff

The only people who seem to love Windows, are techs who make money
"fixing" problems and re-installing everything when it gets infected.

Lidiots are just about worse than iDdicts.

geoff

 

[Mike McGinn]

On 2013-11-07, Jeff Henig <yomama@yomama.com> wrote:

sctvguy1 <sctvguy1@invalid.net> wrote:
On Fri, 08 Nov 2013 09:12:09 +1300, geoff wrote:

sctvguy1 wrote:

I dropped Windows years ago. Run Linux. No problems.

I'm sure if OP had let things do themselves without interference he
wouldn't had had the slight 15 minute inconvenience that he he. Hardly
a reason to ditch an OS and all the applications he knows and loves ....

geoff

The only people who seem to love Windows, are techs who make money
"fixing" problems and re-installing everything when it gets infected.

"Love"?

Sorry, we don't all sexualize our digits.

Personally, I use what I'm used to using because I want to make music, not
learn another OS that might or might not work for what I need.

I have been using Linux almost exclusively for ten years. I prefer it,
it works well for me. I do a lot of software development and it is well
suited for that. I do have Windows and Linux machines I deal with at
work. Updates are much simpler on Linux than Windows. I like that it is
very gard to get a virus in Linux unless you do something really stupid.

Having said that, I think people should use what they like and what
suits them. I think arguing about operating systems is as pointless as
arguing over religion.

Can we get back to radios now? I have an old Tek 453 on the getting some
power supply work. Those are tight little units, but I like them. They
are funky. It is amazing how they crammed so much performance in a small
package in 1966. I'll be looking for a 454 when this is done.

For me that is a lot of the charm of working on old stuff. I realized it
as a teen back in the early '70s when the Staten Island Historical
Society let me work on their antique radio collection. It is amazing
what they did with what they had.



--
Mike McGinn KD2CNU
"More kidneys than eyes."

 

[Michael Black]

On Thu, 7 Nov 2013, William Sommerwerck wrote:

"sctvguy1" wrote in message news:l5gp4p$9m8$2@dont-email.me...

I dropped Windows years ago. Run Linux. No problems.

Does Linux run Word? Ventura? Photoshop? Interface with my AIBO? LEGOs? Canon
and Epson scanners?

I've had a Canon scanner for years, have never had a problem.

The reality is, most people (like the type who crosspost off-topic threads
like this to their favorite newsgroups rather than find the right place to
post it) experience Windows and nothing else. Hence everything has to
compare to it.

The one time I used Word was on a Mac Plus 19 years ago, it had a driver
for a plain printer rather than an Imagewriter, so I could use my old dot
matrix printer, using my Radio Shack Model 100 laptop as a serial to
parallel converter. I also bought it cheap at a garage sale.

I haven't a clue what Ventura is, and only know of Photoshop because
people talk about it.

Yes, I'm the odd one, I've never run Windows. I've dabbled in it, someone
else's computer or getting a "new" computer before I erase Windows. It's
really odd, I can't find things, I have no idea how to do specific things.
Sure, the general motions are the same, but people fit Windows because
that's what they know.

Since I've never really used WIndows, I have no comparison. GIMP works
for me, it does what I need. If it's missing something, I have no idea
since I've not used the overloaded Photoshop. There was a whole period,
fifteen years ago, when people would send me Word files that I couldn't
rad, but that's simmered down, they've caught on that files should be in a
more universal standard. Just because "everyone runs Windows" doesnt'
mean I should be seen as riffraff.

Over the years, I have had little trouble with Windows. Contrary to what some
people might think, it is not scarier than blueberry pancakes.

I never bought into it in th first place, barely used MSDOS for that
matter. I have absolutely no argument with WIndows, since I really know
little about it. I do have a big argument with people assuming the whole
world uses Windows, and if we don't, we are the problem.

Michael

 

[Joe Bento]

On 11/7/2013 8:39 PM, Mike McGinn wrote:

Can we get back to radios now? I have an old Tek 453 on the getting some
power supply work. Those are tight little units, but I like them. They
are funky. It is amazing how they crammed so much performance in a small
package in 1966. I'll be looking for a 454 when this is done.

Certainly. We'll just go for a couple weeks with essentially zero
messages posted other than the occasional, "Is anyone home?"

Joe, N6DGY

 

[Trevor]

"Michael Black" <et472@ncf.ca> wrote in message
news:alpine.LNX.2.02.1311072207020.4632@darkstar.example.org...

On Thu, 7 Nov 2013, William Sommerwerck wrote:
"sctvguy1" wrote in message news:l5gp4p$9m8$2@dont-email.me...
I dropped Windows years ago. Run Linux. No problems.

Does Linux run Word? Ventura? Photoshop? Interface with my AIBO? LEGOs?
Canon and Epson scanners?

I've had a Canon scanner for years, have never had a problem.

The reality is, most people (like the type who crosspost off-topic threads
like this to their favorite newsgroups rather than find the right place to
post it) experience Windows and nothing else. Hence everything has to
compare to it.

The one time I used Word was on a Mac Plus 19 years ago, it had a driver
for a plain printer rather than an Imagewriter, so I could use my old dot
matrix printer, using my Radio Shack Model 100 laptop as a serial to
parallel converter. I also bought it cheap at a garage sale.

I haven't a clue what Ventura is, and only know of Photoshop because
people talk about it.

Yes, I'm the odd one, I've never run Windows. I've dabbled in it, someone
else's computer or getting a "new" computer before I erase Windows. It's
really odd, I can't find things, I have no idea how to do specific things.
Sure, the general motions are the same, but people fit Windows because
that's what they know.

Since I've never really used WIndows, I have no comparison. GIMP works
for me, it does what I need. If it's missing something, I have no idea
since I've not used the overloaded Photoshop. There was a whole period,
fifteen years ago, when people would send me Word files that I couldn't
read,

Even then there were Linux programs readily available to read Word docs and
Photoshop images. No idea about Ventura.

but that's simmered down, they've caught on that files should be in a more
universal standard. Just because "everyone runs Windows" doesnt' mean I
should be seen as riffraff.

Just because people don't need to care what you choose to do, doesn't mean
they have any opionion of you one way or the other.

Over the years, I have had little trouble with Windows. Contrary to what
some people might think, it is not scarier than blueberry pancakes.

I never bought into it in th first place, barely used MSDOS for that
matter. I have absolutely no argument with WIndows, since I really know
little about it. I do have a big argument with people assuming the whole
world uses Windows, and if we don't, we are the problem.

Nope, not the whole world, but 90% makes for a fair majority. Just as
English is the default language on the internet, many people can and do
choose to stick with what they know instead. And since English is not the
first language of 90% of computer users, a far better case can be made for
some people using another one! Doesn't mean you have to learn it though.
Thankfully or the whole world would do nothing but learn dozens of
languages. Same goes for companies who choose to support only the majority
operating systems, and users who prefer a mainstream "standard".

Trevor.

 

[William Sommerwerck]

If Windows (and to a lesser degree, the Mac OS) didn't exist, there would
likely be a plethora of operating systems, and people would be complaining
"Why can't we have a single standard?".

I do not grovel in front of Windows. I use it because it's what I started with
when I worked at Microsoft, and it has the widest range of available
applications. It also works well.

The basic problem with Windows is that it's designed to be a more or less
universal OS that meets just about anyone's needs. Unfortunately, Microsoft
has never put out the effort to minimize the amount of "fussing" a serious
user has to go through to get the most out of the system.

I strongly recommend the book "Windows 7 Annoyances". It has good chapters on
security and networking that are almost worth the price of the book.

 

[Scott Dorsey]

William Sommerwerck <grizzledgeezer@comcast.net> wrote:

If Windows (and to a lesser degree, the Mac OS) didn't exist, there would
likely be a plethora of operating systems, and people would be complaining
"Why can't we have a single standard?".

And this was what it was like in the seventies and eighties. And, overall
it was a good thing because it encouraged people to make their applications
portable.

I think having a heterogeneous environment is a good thing for a lot of
different reasons, not just because it makes malware propagation more
difficult but also because it forces people to think about the compromises
being made in their implementations.

It also means that people developing more complex systems based around a
computer (like a DAW for instance) have more choices. Often those systems
have requirements which are very different than those of "general purpose"
computing appliances and it is good to have such choices available when they
are needed.
--scott


--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

 

[Les Cargill]

Scott Dorsey wrote:

William Sommerwerck <grizzledgeezer@comcast.net> wrote:
If Windows (and to a lesser degree, the Mac OS) didn't exist, there would
likely be a plethora of operating systems, and people would be complaining
"Why can't we have a single standard?".

And this was what it was like in the seventies and eighties. And, overall
it was a good thing because it encouraged people to make their applications
portable.

Portability is pretty expensive. And given how dissimilar platforms
are, it is of mixed value, IMO.

Very basic functionality is quite different from platform to platform.

I think having a heterogeneous environment is a good thing for a lot of
different reasons, not just because it makes malware propagation more
difficult but also because it forces people to think about the compromises
being made in their implementations.

People don't generally like to think about implementations when they
don't have to.

It also means that people developing more complex systems based around a
computer (like a DAW for instance) have more choices.

I don't really think we'd have had DAW programs at all had it not been
for Mac and Windows as platforms. Maybe something lire RADAR, but it
wasn't priced to sell. Maybe something like the Amiga, although
it was pretty limited.

Often those systems
have requirements which are very different than those of "general purpose"
computing appliances and it is good to have such choices available when they
are needed.

Agreed; although it's not clear that the propagation of such systems
would have been ... satisfactory.

The last thing I read about the Linux standards group for audio/
multimedia , they were still designing the basic atoms of things.

--scott

--
Les Cargill

 

[William Sommerwerck]

"Scott Dorsey" wrote in message news:l5ioqo$km5$1@panix2.panix.com...

I think having a heterogeneous environment is a good thing for a lot of
different reasons, not just because it makes malware propagation more
difficult but also because it forces people to think about the compromises
being made in their implementations.

It also means that people developing more complex systems based around a
computer (like a DAW for instance) have more choices. Often those systems
have requirements which are very different than those of "general purpose"
computing appliances and it is good to have such choices available when they
are needed.

No argument -- in principle -- but isn't Windows+Mac+Linux sufficiently
heterogeneous?

 

[Scott Dorsey]

William Sommerwerck <grizzledgeezer@comcast.net> wrote:

"Scott Dorsey" wrote in message news:l5ioqo$km5$1@panix2.panix.com...

I think having a heterogeneous environment is a good thing for a lot of
different reasons, not just because it makes malware propagation more
difficult but also because it forces people to think about the compromises
being made in their implementations.

It also means that people developing more complex systems based around a
computer (like a DAW for instance) have more choices. Often those systems
have requirements which are very different than those of "general purpose"
computing appliances and it is good to have such choices available when they
are needed.

No argument -- in principle -- but isn't Windows+Mac+Linux sufficiently
heterogeneous?

Maybe it is. They're all three running on the exact same computer architecture
most of the time, though. And certainly they are far more heterogeneous than
they were even a decade ago.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

 

[dave]

On 11/07/2013 07:35 PM, Trevor wrote:

Nope, not the whole world, but 90% makes for a fair majority. Just as
English is the default language on the internet, many people can and do
choose to stick with what they know instead. And since English is not the
first language of 90% of computer users, a far better case can be made for
some people using another one! Doesn't mean you have to learn it though.
Thankfully or the whole world would do nothing but learn dozens of
languages. Same goes for companies who choose to support only the majority
operating systems, and users who prefer a mainstream "standard".

Trevor.

How do you justify paying $200 for a computer operating system that does
nothing but send you places that ask for money? The Windows world is
like North Las Vegas. It is crass, commercial and everyone has to get
their hands dirty. I have a netbook with XP that I need to talk to my
iPod. Next year I plan to buy a Windows7 refurb from a Windows reseller.
They go for between $50 and a $100 n eBay, less than half what a
builder pays for the OS alone. This is only so I can run the Apple crap
and maybe some LT spice. My main surfing machine and my ham radio
machines are 100% open source and commercial free..

 

[dave]

On 11/07/2013 07:39 PM, Mike McGinn wrote:

On 2013-11-07, Jeff Henig <yomama@yomama.com> wrote:
sctvguy1 <sctvguy1@invalid.net> wrote:
On Fri, 08 Nov 2013 09:12:09 +1300, geoff wrote:

sctvguy1 wrote:

I dropped Windows years ago. Run Linux. No problems.

I'm sure if OP had let things do themselves without interference he
wouldn't had had the slight 15 minute inconvenience that he he. Hardly
a reason to ditch an OS and all the applications he knows and loves ....

geoff

The only people who seem to love Windows, are techs who make money
"fixing" problems and re-installing everything when it gets infected.

"Love"?

Sorry, we don't all sexualize our digits.

Personally, I use what I'm used to using because I want to make music, not
learn another OS that might or might not work for what I need.


I have been using Linux almost exclusively for ten years. I prefer it,
it works well for me. I do a lot of software development and it is well
suited for that. I do have Windows and Linux machines I deal with at
work. Updates are much simpler on Linux than Windows. I like that it is
very gard to get a virus in Linux unless you do something really stupid.

Having said that, I think people should use what they like and what
suits them. I think arguing about operating systems is as pointless as
arguing over religion.

Can we get back to radios now? I have an old Tek 453 on the getting some
power supply work. Those are tight little units, but I like them. They
are funky. It is amazing how they crammed so much performance in a small
package in 1966. I'll be looking for a 454 when this is done.

For me that is a lot of the charm of working on old stuff. I realized it
as a teen back in the early '70s when the Staten Island Historical
Society let me work on their antique radio collection. It is amazing
what they did with what they had.



I love all the shiny gold switches etc. inside Teks.

 

[dave]

On 11/07/2013 09:02 PM, Jeff Henig wrote:

Mike McGinn <mikemcginn@mcginnweb.net> wrote:
On 2013-11-07, Jeff Henig <yomama@yomama.com> wrote:
sctvguy1 <sctvguy1@invalid.net> wrote:
On Fri, 08 Nov 2013 09:12:09 +1300, geoff wrote:

sctvguy1 wrote:

I dropped Windows years ago. Run Linux. No problems.

I'm sure if OP had let things do themselves without interference he
wouldn't had had the slight 15 minute inconvenience that he he. Hardly
a reason to ditch an OS and all the applications he knows and loves ....

geoff

The only people who seem to love Windows, are techs who make money
"fixing" problems and re-installing everything when it gets infected.

"Love"?

Sorry, we don't all sexualize our digits.

Personally, I use what I'm used to using because I want to make music, not
learn another OS that might or might not work for what I need.


I have been using Linux almost exclusively for ten years. I prefer it,
it works well for me. I do a lot of software development and it is well
suited for that. I do have Windows and Linux machines I deal with at
work. Updates are much simpler on Linux than Windows. I like that it is
very gard to get a virus in Linux unless you do something really stupid.

Having said that, I think people should use what they like and what
suits them. I think arguing about operating systems is as pointless as
arguing over religion.

Can we get back to radios now? I have an old Tek 453 on the getting some
power supply work. Those are tight little units, but I like them. They
are funky. It is amazing how they crammed so much performance in a small
package in 1966. I'll be looking for a 454 when this is done.

For me that is a lot of the charm of working on old stuff. I realized it
as a teen back in the early '70s when the Staten Island Historical
Society let me work on their antique radio collection. It is amazing
what they did with what they had.



Oh hey, I get that. If Linux was what I knew, I'd probably use that,
myself.

And the old stuff gets respect from me, for sure. I know that modern cars
are more evolved, but I miss my first car--a 1967 Mustang fastback. And
right now I'd really enjoy foolin' with an old tube radio for the fun of
it.


Sometimes I do miss the tinkering...

If you can use Windows you already know 98% of Linux.

 

[dave]

On 11/08/2013 05:40 AM, Les Cargill wrote:

Scott Dorsey wrote:

Portability is pretty expensive. And given how dissimilar platforms
are, it is of mixed value, IMO.

Very basic functionality is quite different from platform to platform.

You can have a triple boot Notebook if you want. YouTube looks the same
on WIN and *X.

People don't generally like to think about implementations when they
don't have to.

Unless the implements are very shiny.

I don't really think we'd have had DAW programs at all had it not been
for Mac and Windows as platforms. Maybe something lire RADAR, but it
wasn't priced to sell. Maybe something like the Amiga, although
it was pretty limited.

There were DAWs before Windows and Mac

Agreed; although it's not clear that the propagation of such systems
would have been ... satisfactory.

The last thing I read about the Linux standards group for audio/
multimedia , they were still designing the basic atoms of things.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_audio_workstation#Free_and_open_source_software

https://duckduckgo.com/?t=lm&q=linux+daw

--scott



--
Les Cargill

dave

 

[dave]

On 11/08/2013 07:58 AM, William Sommerwerck wrote:

"Scott Dorsey" wrote in message news:l5ioqo$km5$1@panix2.panix.com...

I think having a heterogeneous environment is a good thing for a lot of
different reasons, not just because it makes malware propagation more
difficult but also because it forces people to think about the
compromises
being made in their implementations.

It also means that people developing more complex systems based around a
computer (like a DAW for instance) have more choices. Often those
systems
have requirements which are very different than those of "general
purpose"
computing appliances and it is good to have such choices available
when they
are needed.

No argument -- in principle -- but isn't Windows+Mac+Linux sufficiently
heterogeneous?

Mac OSX and Linux are cousins (both derived from from AT&T Unix).
Windows is based on patching and quilting and something called "Quick
and Dirty Operating System".

The fastest computers on earth all run Linux.

 

[dave]

On 11/08/2013 08:52 AM, Scott Dorsey wrote:

William Sommerwerck <grizzledgeezer@comcast.net> wrote:
"Scott Dorsey" wrote in message news:l5ioqo$km5$1@panix2.panix.com...

I think having a heterogeneous environment is a good thing for a lot of
different reasons, not just because it makes malware propagation more
difficult but also because it forces people to think about the compromises
being made in their implementations.

It also means that people developing more complex systems based around a
computer (like a DAW for instance) have more choices. Often those systems
have requirements which are very different than those of "general purpose"
computing appliances and it is good to have such choices available when they
are needed.

No argument -- in principle -- but isn't Windows+Mac+Linux sufficiently
heterogeneous?

Maybe it is. They're all three running on the exact same computer architecture
most of the time, though. And certainly they are far more heterogeneous than
they were even a decade ago.
--scott

BTW You can occasionally find a Nagra IV-S for under a hundred bucks
here nowadays.

 

[Les Cargill]

dave wrote:

On 11/08/2013 05:40 AM, Les Cargill wrote:
Scott Dorsey wrote:

Portability is pretty expensive. And given how dissimilar platforms
are, it is of mixed value, IMO.

Very basic functionality is quite different from platform to platform.


You can have a triple boot Notebook if you want. YouTube looks the same
on WIN and *X.

I prefer VMs

People don't generally like to think about implementations when they
don't have to.

Unless the implements are very shiny.

I LIKE SHINY THING! SHINY THING GOOD!

I don't really think we'd have had DAW programs at all had it not been
for Mac and Windows as platforms. Maybe something lire RADAR, but it
wasn't priced to sell. Maybe something like the Amiga, although
it was pretty limited.

There were DAWs before Windows and Mac

Sorta. But now, we have the capability of a New England Digital system
for much less trouble.

Agreed; although it's not clear that the propagation of such systems
would have been ... satisfactory.

The last thing I read about the Linux standards group for audio/
multimedia , they were still designing the basic atoms of things.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_audio_workstation#Free_and_open_source_software

The good news is that REAPER runs in Wine...

https://duckduckgo.com/?t=lm&q=linux+daw



--scott



--
Les Cargill

dave

--
Les Cargill

 

[Scott Dorsey]

dave <dave@dave.dave> wrote:

BTW You can occasionally find a Nagra IV-S for under a hundred bucks
here nowadays.

I'll take all you can get at that price. Prices on those machines are
actually rising... they hit rock bottom a few years ago but they now seem
to be getting snapped up by collectors. I have been getting a lot of repair
work from guys buying the things who don't know what they are buying.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."