The reality of driving an EV cross-country...

[Don Y]

On 6/9/2022 7:09 AM, bitrex wrote:

On 6/9/2022 4:36 AM, Don Y wrote:
On 6/8/2022 12:05 PM, Tom Del Rosso wrote:
bitrex wrote:

They took a modern fast-charging EV along a route that didn\'t have the
infrastructure to support it, and discover...there wasn\'t the
infrastructure to support it. News?

When everybody has an EV and there isn\'t enough grid power to charge
them will that be news to you?

I\'m sure glad there\'s never a shortage (real OR artificial) of petroleum
products (/cf/ Arab Oil Embargo) that might cause rationing or other
measures to control (limit) demand!


There\'s no need to subsidize the electric car biz when they could just stop
subsidizing the oil biz. But the US government doesn\'t really want to do the
former or stop doing the latter, until someone in the former biz starts
coughing up enough cash to make it worth their while that is.

Most of the \"subsidies\" are in-baked, regardless of gummit involvement.

How many NON-dealer shops can you bring your EV for service?
Are they just (effectively) veneers over the dealer\'s parts department?
Can you buy a third party battery, motor, etc. to repair/replace
one that has failed in your EV? What modifications can you make to the
drivetrain? Plant?

Besides choosing the scent of your air freshener, what choices do you
have in your vehicle\'s future?

[Imagine all of the folks NOT employed giving you those choices and
the pricing inflexibility that ensues]

Will you ever be able to find a *used* EV that \"po\' foke\" can afford?

An ICE owner can *choose* the amount of \"driving capacity\" that
he wants to afford -- up to the size of the metal container that holds
the fuel. Can you buy a \"cheaper\" version of an EV that is only useful
for 20 mile/day travel? And, if you wanted to drive 300 miles, could
you do so, practically?

E.g., we drive ~100 mi/wk, on average. Rarely more than 20 miles
at a time.

But, *could* opt to drive to feenigs AND BACK (~300 mi) without refueling.
And, don\'t have to resort to an \"extended range\" version of the vehicle
to do so. And, this is likely true for *every* ICE in town, regardless
of \"trim level\"/price point.

 

[Don Y]

On 6/9/2022 10:38 AM, Jeroen Belleman wrote:

The weird thing is that high-performance electronic instrument
makers use Windows. Look at LeCroy, Tektronix, Agilent, or whatever
they call themselves now. Bad choices, all of them. Why?

Why \"bad\"? What *can\'t* the kit do BECAUSE it runs on a
Windows platform?

It\'s the same \"make or buy\" decision as with any component/IP in your
product (why not make your own cardboard shipping boxes?)

You *make* when you can add value. You *buy* when you can\'t
(\"value\" can take the form of reduced cost).

Embrace a bit of FOSS and now you need to become expert in that
\"component\" -- cuz there\'s no one you can CALL (or sue!) if
it fails to perform as expected. \"Linux, Inc.\"?

Folks who roll their own OS\'s either have trivial needs *or*
exotic needs that can\'t (economically) be met from COTS offerings.
Building on Linux is, effectively, rolling your own OS.

 

[John Doe]

bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:

John Doe wrote:
bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:
John Doe wrote:
Ricky wrote:
jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
Klaus Vestergaard Kragelund wrote:
Flyguy wrote:

This is an article about an actual cross-country road trip in an
EV

https://www.wsj.com/articles/i-rented-an-electric-car-for-a-four-d
ay
-road-trip-i-spent-more-time-charging-it-than-i-did-sleeping-11654
26 8401?page=1

Supercharging is at a rate of 700miles/hour, so if you average 60
miles

on road, you would spend 33 hours driving, and 3 hours charging.
(not counting that you could charge during sleep)

Can you leave your car at a supercharger for 8+ hours while you
sleep?

How do you get from the supercharger to/from a decent hotel?

A Supercharger is for rapid charging. You are not allowed to leave
your car while connected after charging. You get billed $1 per
minute. That would be an expensive stay in a hotel. It would be
cheaper to stay in the nice hotel, then pay them to take your car to
the Supercharger and bring it back when charged.

But wait! Someone has thought of this!!! The typical hotel has BEV
charging facilities, of the level 2 type. That is a lower rate
charger, designed to be plugged in overnight! Wow! It\'s amazing
that people actually come up with solutions to the BEV worrisome
problems that keep Larkin awake all night.

Ricksy\'s arguments remind me of Linux Lunatics trying to sell Linux
to ordinary users. Sounds good, but it\'s not reality.

They made some Linux derivatives for \"ordinary users\" they\'re called
Android and ChromeOS.

Huh??? That has nothing to do with my comment. Nobody is trying to sell
Linux to smartphone users.

Linux sucks for mainstream PC use.

Why, \"mainstream PC users\" don\'t do very much with a PC other than
browse the Web, write emails, watch YouTube videos...

I\'ve always hung out with real PC users. Those who push the envelope at
least from time to time. I consider them mainstream PC users.

distros like Ubuntu and Mint are fine for that stuff. It tends to just
work with a very large amount of off-the-shelf hardware

No, it doesn\'t.

I can think of tasks it\'s not well-suited for like AV production,
hardcore gaming, etc. largely due to lack of a big software ecosystem
for those.

It\'s not just big applications and hardcore gaming. It\'s the fact that PC
users need the OS to support ANY applications or games they feel like
running.

A lot of the stuff I run on my PC couldn\'t run at all under Linux. And
anything that runs under \"wine\" or whatever you call it isn\'t a valid
reason. Nobody wants to run their applications SLOWER than they run on
Windows.

 

[John Doe]

Jan Panteltje <pNaonStpealmtje@yahoo.com> wrote:

John Doe wrote:
bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:

They made some Linux derivatives for \"ordinary users\" they\'re called
Android and ChromeOS.

Huh??? That has nothing to do with my comment. Nobody is trying to sell
Linux to smartphone users.

You have no clue what Linux is it seems.

I\'ve had a clue ever since decades ago when I observed two guys going
back-and-forth about it. One of them said \"Linux is the Holy Grail of
operating systems\". He was right, to this day.

Linux sucks for mainstream PC use.

Oh boy..

I just tried the latest Ubuntu on a x86 laptop and also on an ARM
computer (Raspberry). It is so \'automatic\' it just works with all the
exotic hardware.

Everybody can use it without knowing much about Linux..

Definitely not anybody who wants to do a lot of stuff with their PC.

The poster knows little about PC use...

Of course it must be hardware compatible, but hardware is determined by
software. Software is determined by users. Software is the reason real
people use a computer. I am a PC enthusiast, but I acknowledge love for an
operating system has nothing to do with real world users. Real world users
care about APPLICATIONS, not about hardware or the operating system.

I run stuff on my Windows PC, for example speech recognition and speech
activated scripting, the poster cannot run on its Linux PC.

Linux is a server operating system. Always has been, always will be
(except for smartphones).

 

[John Doe]

bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:

He\'s got it backwards, the world would be a nicer and more secure place
by far if mainstream users all used Linux. Only people who know what
they\'re doing should be allowed to mess with Windows..

The problem is applications. If I could do everything on a Linux PC that I
can do on a Windows PC, that would be great. But that\'s not the case.

 

[John Doe]

Jan Panteltje <pNaonStpealmtje@yahoo.com> wrote:

Probably he uses Linux without even knowing it. His drone may use it,
his TV may use it, his wireless stuff may use it... lots of things use a
version of Linux.

Sure. I\'m not a zealot like some people are. I\'m not saying Linux should
magically become a mainstream operating system instead of being a server
and smartphone operating system. I have no problem using my Android
smartphone, except for the fact Google\'s Linux implementation too often
tries to force me into stuff Google wants me to do and not stuff I want to
do. Sort of like Google search.

The problem with Linux has nothing to do with virtue.

I prefer open source software, but that\'s not an option for mainstream PC
users. It\'s by far not an option for a PC user who pushes the envelope.

 

[John Doe]

Jeroen Belleman <jeroen@nospam.please> wrote:

The weird thing is that high-performance electronic instrument
makers use Windows. Look at LeCroy, Tektronix, Agilent, or whatever
they call themselves now. Bad choices, all of them. Why?

The vast majority of *paying* PC users use Windows. Therefore, software is
developed for Windows. That attracts more users. It\'s a feedback loop. All
that stuff was detailed in the big Microsoft antitrust trial pre-2000.

Software developers aren\'t developing software for Linux users because those
users don\'t PAY for software, they pirate it. They can\'t have it both ways.
They don\'t pay for it, so they don\'t influence it.

 

[whit3rd]

On Thursday, June 9, 2022 at 5:38:22 PM UTC-7, John Doe wrote:

Linux is a server operating system. Always has been, always will be
(except for smartphones).

Well, no; it\'s a server except for when it\'s a client... it is interoperable
with a per-unit install cost that isn\'t at the whim of Microsoft, Apple,
IBM...

It also has a market niche where one wants a secure OS, with examinable source.

 

[John Doe]

But of course I didn\'t say \"Linux runs only on servers\".

allintext:\"a server operating system\" (on YouTube or Google search)

Maybe that will help this silly troll...



whit3rd <whit3rd@gmail.com> wrote:

On Thursday, June 9, 2022 at 5:38:22 PM UTC-7, John Doe wrote:

Linux is a server operating system. Always has been, always will be
(except for smartphones).

Well, no; it\'s a server except for when it\'s a client... it is interoperable
with a per-unit install cost that isn\'t at the whim of Microsoft, Apple,
IBM...

It also has a market niche where one wants a secure OS, with examinable source.

 

[John Doe]

John Doe wrote:

But of course I didn\'t say \"Linux runs only on servers\".

allintext:\"a server operating system\" (on YouTube or Google search)

On Google...

About 796,000 results

That\'s a lot of results for a four word quote.

Not quite as many as \"to be or not to be\" (17+ million) but I\'m getting
there.

 

[rbowman]

On 06/09/2022 09:50 AM, Jan Panteltje wrote:
> Probably he uses Linux without even knowing it.

Many of out clients run Windows Server in VMs on high availability
systems. What\'s spinning up all those VMs? RedHat and kvm.

 

[rbowman]

On 06/09/2022 02:36 AM, Don Y wrote:

On 6/8/2022 12:05 PM, Tom Del Rosso wrote:
bitrex wrote:

They took a modern fast-charging EV along a route that didn\'t have the
infrastructure to support it, and discover...there wasn\'t the
infrastructure to support it. News?

When everybody has an EV and there isn\'t enough grid power to charge
them will that be news to you?

I\'m sure glad there\'s never a shortage (real OR artificial) of petroleum
products (/cf/ Arab Oil Embargo) that might cause rationing or other
measures to control (limit) demand!

And on even days you can buy 5 gallons of gas... Been there, done that,
and lived through the inflation when Nixon\'s wage and price controls
unraveled. Jimmy really should have stuck to peanuts rather than buying
that pig in a poke.

 

[rbowman]

On 06/09/2022 08:02 AM, bitrex wrote:

The boomers were entering their mid 30s in 1984 and were nostalgic for
the cars of the 60s already. The 1968 Hurst/Olds made 390 HP with a
Hurst Dual Gate shifter that was something other than a gimmick.

The boomers are still nostalgic for cars of the 60s like the latter,
that to this day they remember driving as teenagers or in their early
20s. I have no nostalgia for the cars of my teens and 20s, the ones I
could afford were pretty bad:

Actually I prefer the 50\'s or older. I go to car shows and see something
like a meticulously restored Chevelle and wonder why bother.

 

[bitrex]

On 6/9/2022 11:09 PM, rbowman wrote:

On 06/09/2022 08:02 AM, bitrex wrote:
The boomers were entering their mid 30s in 1984 and were nostalgic for
the cars of the 60s already. The 1968 Hurst/Olds made 390 HP with a
Hurst Dual Gate shifter that was something other than a gimmick.

The boomers are still nostalgic for cars of the 60s like the latter,
that to this day they remember driving as teenagers or in their early
20s. I have no nostalgia for the cars of my teens and 20s, the ones I
could afford were pretty bad:

Actually I prefer the 50\'s or older. I go to car shows and see something
like a meticulously restored Chevelle and wonder why bother.

ye olde rocket 88:

<https://youtu.be/VXrAbG92h0A?t=86>

 

[Don Y]

On 6/9/2022 8:05 PM, rbowman wrote:

On 06/09/2022 02:36 AM, Don Y wrote:
On 6/8/2022 12:05 PM, Tom Del Rosso wrote:
bitrex wrote:

They took a modern fast-charging EV along a route that didn\'t have the
infrastructure to support it, and discover...there wasn\'t the
infrastructure to support it. News?

When everybody has an EV and there isn\'t enough grid power to charge
them will that be news to you?

I\'m sure glad there\'s never a shortage (real OR artificial) of petroleum
products (/cf/ Arab Oil Embargo) that might cause rationing or other
measures to control (limit) demand!

And on even days you can buy 5 gallons of gas... Been there, done that, and
lived through the inflation when Nixon\'s wage and price controls unraveled.
Jimmy really should have stuck to peanuts rather than buying that pig in a poke.

Yes. The point is arbitrary comparisons can be CREATED to \"prove\" any claim.

If you want to look at the TRUE, total impact of a transportation methodology,
then drag in ALL of the related externalities and put dollar figures on each.
E.g., wait until the gas tax is replaced by a *mileage* tax payable annually
at time of registration. And, the cost (including environmental impact) of
mining materials essential to battery production, copper, etc. is factored
in -- along with any wars concocted to secure those supplies. Costs to
society/The Economy due to unaffordability of mobility tied to a particular
technology, etc.

 

[Ricky]

On Thursday, June 9, 2022 at 10:02:59 AM UTC-4, bitrex wrote:

On 6/8/2022 11:41 PM, Ricky wrote:
On Wednesday, June 8, 2022 at 4:55:24 PM UTC-4, bitrex wrote:
On 6/8/2022 10:36 AM, Ricky wrote:

Supercharging is at a rate of 700miles/hour, so if you average 60 miles
on road, you would spend 33 hours driving, and 3 hours charging. (not
counting that you could charge during sleep)
Can you leave your car at a supercharger for 8+ hours while you sleep?

How do you get from the supercharger to/from a decent hotel?

A Supercharger is for rapid charging. You are not allowed to leave your car while connected after charging. You get billed $1 per minute. That would be an expensive stay in a hotel. It would be cheaper to stay in the nice hotel, then pay them to take your car to the Supercharger and bring it back when charged.

But wait! Someone has thought of this!!! The typical hotel has BEV charging facilities, of the level 2 type. That is a lower rate charger, designed to be plugged in overnight! Wow! It\'s amazing that people actually come up with solutions to the BEV worrisome problems that keep Larkin awake all night.

As to getting to or from a hotel... I typically drive my BEV. Not sure what Larkin would do when he can\'t buy an ICE anymore, because no one sells them in hauling capacities of less than 2-1/2 tons.

Here\'s the car for some of the other guys here. 1984 HURST OLDS:

https://youtu.be/YjTqjRK_SQs

(emphasis on OLD)

Look at that gearshift, an automatic with extra steps. Horrible. I don\'t
resent that it had a 307 V8 with 140 HP though, that was just the
fashion at the time.

I enjoyed that video. The commenter has a good sense of humor. I liked the HP descriptions. lol

I\'m not clear on how the Hurst shifter was any different from a regular automatic with the 2 and 1 positions, except that you had to move multiple levers. What that for real? I suppose it allowed for better control in racing, in cars that actually had enough HP? Or was it a complete farce as the commenter seemed to be saying towards the end?

The boomers were entering their mid 30s in 1984 and were nostalgic for
the cars of the 60s already. The 1968 Hurst/Olds made 390 HP with a
Hurst Dual Gate shifter that was something other than a gimmick.

The boomers are still nostalgic for cars of the 60s like the latter,
that to this day they remember driving as teenagers or in their early
20s. I have no nostalgia for the cars of my teens and 20s, the ones I
could afford were pretty bad:

https://youtu.be/mAKdyOUas8k

The Volt is 100% the nicest GM product I\'ve ever owned

LOL! At least you didn\'t say Chrysler product. Still, you aren\'t saying much.

You sold me on how bad the Volt was when you talked about how you had to modulate the regenerative braking by slapping a paddle!


and I\'ve owned a

number of them over the years, starting with my hand-me-down 1990 Chevy
Celebrity that had a pushrod mail truck engine + single point injection
in the throttle body.

Come a long way since then. I do think GM can produce excellent cars
when they _want_ to and often have some of the best designers on tap in
the business, they have money to throw around when they want to also.
But in actually designing anything excellent they\'re regularly hobbled
by an army of bean-counters and generalized corporate stupidity.

Well, it sure seems like they \"want\" to design electric cars. So far, not so good.

--

Rick C.

++ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
++ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 

[Flyguy]

On Thursday, June 9, 2022 at 8:56:07 PM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:

On Thursday, June 9, 2022 at 10:02:59 AM UTC-4, bitrex wrote:
On 6/8/2022 11:41 PM, Ricky wrote:
On Wednesday, June 8, 2022 at 4:55:24 PM UTC-4, bitrex wrote:
On 6/8/2022 10:36 AM, Ricky wrote:

Supercharging is at a rate of 700miles/hour, so if you average 60 miles
on road, you would spend 33 hours driving, and 3 hours charging. (not
counting that you could charge during sleep)
Can you leave your car at a supercharger for 8+ hours while you sleep?

How do you get from the supercharger to/from a decent hotel?

A Supercharger is for rapid charging. You are not allowed to leave your car while connected after charging. You get billed $1 per minute. That would be an expensive stay in a hotel. It would be cheaper to stay in the nice hotel, then pay them to take your car to the Supercharger and bring it back when charged.

But wait! Someone has thought of this!!! The typical hotel has BEV charging facilities, of the level 2 type. That is a lower rate charger, designed to be plugged in overnight! Wow! It\'s amazing that people actually come up with solutions to the BEV worrisome problems that keep Larkin awake all night.

As to getting to or from a hotel... I typically drive my BEV. Not sure what Larkin would do when he can\'t buy an ICE anymore, because no one sells them in hauling capacities of less than 2-1/2 tons.

Here\'s the car for some of the other guys here. 1984 HURST OLDS:

https://youtu.be/YjTqjRK_SQs

(emphasis on OLD)

Look at that gearshift, an automatic with extra steps. Horrible. I don\'t
resent that it had a 307 V8 with 140 HP though, that was just the
fashion at the time.

I enjoyed that video. The commenter has a good sense of humor. I liked the HP descriptions. lol

I\'m not clear on how the Hurst shifter was any different from a regular automatic with the 2 and 1 positions, except that you had to move multiple levers. What that for real? I suppose it allowed for better control in racing, in cars that actually had enough HP? Or was it a complete farce as the commenter seemed to be saying towards the end?

The boomers were entering their mid 30s in 1984 and were nostalgic for
the cars of the 60s already. The 1968 Hurst/Olds made 390 HP with a
Hurst Dual Gate shifter that was something other than a gimmick.

The boomers are still nostalgic for cars of the 60s like the latter,
that to this day they remember driving as teenagers or in their early
20s. I have no nostalgia for the cars of my teens and 20s, the ones I
could afford were pretty bad:

https://youtu.be/mAKdyOUas8k

The Volt is 100% the nicest GM product I\'ve ever owned
LOL! At least you didn\'t say Chrysler product. Still, you aren\'t saying much.

You sold me on how bad the Volt was when you talked about how you had to modulate the regenerative braking by slapping a paddle!
and I\'ve owned a
number of them over the years, starting with my hand-me-down 1990 Chevy
Celebrity that had a pushrod mail truck engine + single point injection
in the throttle body.

Come a long way since then. I do think GM can produce excellent cars
when they _want_ to and often have some of the best designers on tap in
the business, they have money to throw around when they want to also.
But in actually designing anything excellent they\'re regularly hobbled
by an army of bean-counters and generalized corporate stupidity.
Well, it sure seems like they \"want\" to design electric cars. So far, not so good.

--

Rick C.

++ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
++ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

This was a fascinating study in human behavior; the strident true believers like SNIPPERMAN, ricky and Bitrex are in full denial mode that include such tried and true methods as blaming the victim, or ME for just posting the article which I didn\'t write.

This, and other articles on the subject, have a common thread: the EV charging network is sporadic and is in disrepair. Planning cross country trips with an EV amount to a military exercise. EVs WILL NOT be accepted as a primary vehicle UNTIL these issues are fully resolved.

 

[Jan Panteltje]

On a sunny day (Fri, 10 Jun 2022 00:38:15 -0000 (UTC)) it happened John Doe
<always.look@message.header> wrote in <t7u3pm$3pj$4@dont-email.me>:

Jan Panteltje <pNaonStpealmtje@yahoo.com> wrote:

John Doe wrote:
bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:

They made some Linux derivatives for \"ordinary users\" they\'re called
Android and ChromeOS.

Huh??? That has nothing to do with my comment. Nobody is trying to sell
Linux to smartphone users.

You have no clue what Linux is it seems.

I\'ve had a clue ever since decades ago when I observed two guys going
back-and-forth about it. One of them said \"Linux is the Holy Grail of
operating systems\". He was right, to this day.

well, maybe for some.

Linux sucks for mainstream PC use.

Oh boy..

I just tried the latest Ubuntu on a x86 laptop and also on an ARM
computer (Raspberry). It is so \'automatic\' it just works with all the
exotic hardware.

Everybody can use it without knowing much about Linux..

Definitely not anybody who wants to do a lot of stuff with their PC.

You obviously never really used Linux.
I have been writing Linux applications since 1998.
One of the first ones was this Usenet newsreader and am still using it,
see headers (if you can on your MSW computa).




>The poster knows little about PC use...

I worked for a company that worked with IBM, designed ISA cards among other things
and designed hardware and wrote code in x86 asm for many things that were used in industry.

So I dare say I know a bit about PCs and the people who use those.

Of course it must be hardware compatible, but hardware is determined by
software. Software is determined by users. Software is the reason real
people use a computer. I am a PC enthusiast, but I acknowledge love for an
operating system has nothing to do with real world users. Real world users
care about APPLICATIONS, not about hardware or the operating system.

Likely there are more Linux / Unix based application than for that MS system,
mainly because of open source.
If not you can often use something like wine (Linux windows emulator) to run MS windows stuff.
Or just dual boot..

I run stuff on my Windows PC, for example speech recognition and speech
activated scripting, the poster cannot run on its Linux PC.

What a joke, my first speech recognition on Linux goes back about 20 years
I used it to control my satellite receiver, saying \'show BBC\' would show BBC, etc.
There are MANY text to speech programs for Linux, some are not even bound by the OS but use google translate
if there is a net connection, all open source,
I have tested many of those and have some on my system.

Here is a 2 line script that uses mplayer, google translate and a net connection for text to speech,
you can modify the \'=en\' to=\'XX\' for other languaages pronounciation..
mplayer is present in most Linux distros.

#!/bin/bash
say() { local IFS=+;/usr/bin/mplayer -ao alsa -really-quiet -noconsolecontrols \"http://translate.google.com/translate_tts?ie=UTF-8&client=tw-ob&q=$*&tl=en\"; }
say $*

So you type
gst2_en \"Hello World\"

No need to even install anything...
decent voice too.

Linux is a server operating system. Always has been, always will be
(except for smartphones).

No way, Linux is simply a multitasking OS that was (before that Rathead clown messed up its simplicity with dbus shit) very simple.
I wrote a multitasker myself long ago for Z80..
Linux (or better Unix) is an internally consistent very good operating system.
Maybe the old boys (or lifeforms or whatever is politically correct these days) will
remember the days of DR DOS (Digital Research Disk Operating System) and Windows 3.1, I mean when Billy the Gates
stated that internet was not really much...
that old Win 3.1 could run on DR DOS!! I used it that way and had Trumpet winsock to connect to the internet!
So basically ran on DOS, the GUI was separate
In fear of competition (From Digital Research) Billy than integrated the underlying MS DOS into the GUI and a lot of crap mess it has ever been since.
Linux I can still boot up to the command line and return to the command line with ALT F1 or ALT F2 and back to the X11 GUI with what was it ALT F7 or something
That basic Linux is a cool thing.

As to applications: Linux distros come with things like Open Office etc that do much of what many MS users use a PC for.
And free at that

Anyways MS is already dead, they still do not know it.

Probably no use to try to educate those who do not want to learn
\"He who refuses to see is effectively blind\"

 

[Jan Panteltje]

On a sunny day (Thu, 09 Jun 2022 19:38:45 +0200) it happened Jeroen Belleman
<jeroen@nospam.please> wrote in <t7tb76$nac$1@gioia.aioe.org>:

On 2022-06-09 17:50, Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Thu, 9 Jun 2022 10:05:05 -0400) it happened bitrex
user@example.net> wrote in <m6noK.10511$Vxw.1827@fx07.iad>:

On 6/9/2022 2:57 AM, Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Wed, 8 Jun 2022 21:17:23 -0000 (UTC)) it happened John Doe
always.look@message.header> wrote in <t7r3l2$jb2$1@dont-email.me>:

bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:

They made some Linux derivatives for \"ordinary users\" they\'re called
Android and ChromeOS.

Huh??? That has nothing to do with my comment. Nobody is trying to sell
Linux to smartphone users.

You have no clue what Linux is it seems.


Linux sucks for mainstream PC use.

Oh boy..

I just tried the latest Ubuntu on a x86 laptop and also on an ARM computer (Raspberry).
It is so \'automatic\' it just works with all the exotic hardware.

Everybody can use it without knowing much about Linux..

He\'s got it backwards, the world would be a nicer and more secure place
by far if mainstream users all used Linux. Only people who know what
they\'re doing should be allowed to mess with Windows..

Probably he uses Linux without even knowing it.
His drone may use it, his TV may use it, his wireless stuff may use it...
lots of things use a version of Linux.
My Linksys wireless access points use Linux, my Samsung TV uses Linux
If he has a cable router chances are 90% it uses Linux.
I did put Ubuntu as MS WIndows replacement on this now 10 years old Samsung special edition laptop in 2012
Everything worked...
Later I added a Slackware boot option, and then also a Debian one.
I tried the new Ubuntu running from an USB stick
It gives you the choice of playing with it that way or install it.
That USB stick can be put in any x86 based computer with sufficient memory..
Just bring your own OS.
Amazing, started from that USB stick, put in my Huawei 4G USB stick and was online
Automatic! Firefox browser..
No scripts needed, only needed the PIN code for that stick.

The weird thing is that high-performance electronic instrument
makers use Windows. Look at LeCroy, Tektronix, Agilent, or whatever
they call themselves now. Bad choices, all of them. Why?

Most houses have windows.

Linux is even used in space.

The really weird thing is a bunch of Einstein parroting clowns shooting particles at each other
with no practical result other than babble on a piece of paper.
Job creation..
Jan Panteltje once wrote:
\"If you cannot do it with those small particles on the desktop then you cannot do it with a machine the size of the universe.\"

Whatever, after the stone age so many humming lifeworms did so many things...
believed so many wrong theories, .. where will it go?
WW3 may filter some crap out, or / and set us back a few thousand years or more
What works will stay, if us lifeworms are part of what will stay?
Universe is unfolding at least this bang . maybe many of those, some things look repetitive
electrons orbiting.. planets orbiting, big bangs orbiting? Life everywhere,,, Poly Ticksians denying it..
religious leaders afraid of it,
Soon US back to grass huts and rain dances... ?
Most humming population wiped out by climate changes?

WTF do I care?
Mars ? Go there?
Look we need to beam up there, get on with it
Or just pack our DNA and sent it on some Voyager type spacecraft in the hope it lands
and then all that history will repeat itself...
Or they are already here and I am one?
;-)

Jeroen Belleman

 

[Jeroen Belleman]

On 2022-06-10 02:01, Don Y wrote:

On 6/9/2022 10:38 AM, Jeroen Belleman wrote:
The weird thing is that high-performance electronic instrument
makers use Windows. Look at LeCroy, Tektronix, Agilent, or whatever
they call themselves now. Bad choices, all of them. Why?

Why \"bad\"? What *can\'t* the kit do BECAUSE it runs on a
Windows platform?

It\'s bad because Windows is a system widely targeted by hackers,
and which needs patches and upgrades to remain usable. Any
of those may brick the primary purpose of the device, i.e.,
behaving like an electronic instrument. It becomes a maintenance
chore.

If it runs something obscure and proprietary, even though its
security may be lacking, it loses its interest to hackers.

It\'s the same \"make or buy\" decision as with any component/IP in your
product (why not make your own cardboard shipping boxes?)

You *make* when you can add value. You *buy* when you can\'t
(\"value\" can take the form of reduced cost).

Embrace a bit of FOSS and now you need to become expert in that
\"component\" -- cuz there\'s no one you can CALL (or sue!) if
it fails to perform as expected. \"Linux, Inc.\"?

Fair enough. You could outsource that aspect if you don\'t
want to deal with. Besides, if a Windows-based instrument
fails because of some Windows deficiency, who are you going
to sue? Micro$oft? LMAO.

Folks who roll their own OS\'s either have trivial needs *or*
exotic needs that can\'t (economically) be met from COTS offerings.
Building on Linux is, effectively, rolling your own OS.

That\'s absurd.

Jeroen Belleman