On Fri, 20 Apr 2007 23:42:21 +0000, Larry wrote:

"Roger Long" wrote in
:

Does anyone have any solid info on whether Vista will crash if it
doesn't contact Micro$oft via the Internet occasionally?

I may have other reasons now for having a new laptop on board and you
can't get one without Vista. I also down't want to do surgery on the
battery of a new one.


Vista sucks and will for 3 more years as user/guiney pigs do all of
Billy's R&D for free, finding its flaws, security holes and testing its
STUPID copy protection schemes.

XP sales have skyrocketed since its introduction......

The day Vista came out, its first-day sales more than doubled XP's first
day sales. That was the "official" story and sounded great!

What they FAILED to mention was on Vista's first day, XP sales for that
day were 2.8 TIMES what Vista sales were....on that first day...(c;

Larry

When Win95 was released, I knew people in Sydney, Aus. who queued up
on the first day just to get a copy. They didn't even own a computer.
Never did run 95.

cheers
Peter

Vic Smith wrote in
:

Larry, really appreciate your posts. Very informative and useful to
anybody considering various good options - electrical and otherwise -
for their boat.

Kudos to you.



Aw, P'shaw.....(blush)....Twern't nuthin'....(chortle)

Larry
--
Nothing is funnier than a sailor with a new 4KW inverter carrying his
electric heater down the dock with that big smile on his face....(c;

Peter Hendra wrote in
:

When Win95 was released, I knew people in Sydney, Aus. who queued up
on the first day just to get a copy. They didn't even own a computer.
Never did run 95.

cheers
Peter



While 95 was better than 3.1, which was simply a gui put over DOS 3.3
with a few toys, they weren't competing with the MAC, a computer I have
no use for because of its closed environment and expensive software.
Win98 wasn't much better than 95 until the SE version had been out a
year. It is very stable, but limited in memory access and hard drive
partition size by its 16-bit hardware limitations. I still have a 98
machine running, here, doing menial tasks like downloading music and
movies with a little 14" LCD monitor over in the corner. It runs
faultlessly, now that the bugs have matured, for MONTHS at a time with no
reboot on the 2KW UPS everything here plugs into. I simply reload its
que with more binaries off usenet and shut off its monitor until I see
its drive light no longer blinking madly away. Its WD hard drive and DVD
burner must have 50,000 hours on them!

Vista will be fine AFTER the hackers across the planet do all the work
making it safe to use and fixing its bugs. They do a better job because
they are not under the gun of Ballmer staring down at them from above
sending nastygrams about getting the product on the shelves before it's
ready for use....a typical corporate environment, just look at any GM
car.

Larry
--
I missed ME, 2000 and a few versions of NT....(c;

PS - Before the MAC addicts attack, my comment is about the corporations
failure to let these hackers make it better trying to raise profits the
proprietary way. Also, 95% of the software on any shareware site is
WINDOWS, still. LINUX is the best cheap OS. Too bad noone ever agreed
on ONE gui for it or finished version 1.0 of any software available for
it. The genius kids who write LINUX software do something neat. Then,
because of their short attention spans, abandon it about ver 0.953d and
move their short attention span onto the next neat project, never
finishing anything that's still buggy....to LINUX's dismay. If LINUX
ever got organised under one umbrella, Vista would have never been
written. Pity......

In article , Larry wrote:

While 95 was better than 3.1, which was simply a gui put over DOS 3.3
with a few toys, they weren't competing with the MAC, a computer I have
no use for because of its closed environment and expensive software.

Sorry, I can't let that just sit there. In what way is OS X a closed
environment? You get free development tools with the OS, more than can
be said for Windows. Also, it's based on Unix, which is far more stable
than anything MS has produced so far ... and they've had plenty of time
and $deity knows how much money to throw at the problem. As a multi-user
environment it's second to none, program install and removal is better
the MS, no registry to foul up, and no stray files around your system.


LINUX is the best cheap OS. Too bad noone ever agreed
on ONE gui for it or finished version 1.0 of any software available for
it.

Agreed on one GUI? Why restrict choice? Why not have multiple GUIs so
people can choose one they like rather than having to use something that
doesn't work how they want to? You might as well say we should all drive
the same cars or wear the same clothes.

I don't like your suggestion that none of the projects are finished or
usable because they're not even out of beta yet. The kernel is pretty
good. I'm posting using slrn, it's only on version 0.9.8.1, I've been
using it since 1997 and it's not crashed on me yet. In fact, I don't
recall any Linux programs crashing on me and I've been using it almost
exclusively at home since about 1999. I even trust both my business
servers to Linux, and I've had up times of over 400 days on both of
those, only going down for hardware or kernel upgrades. To say projects
are unfinished is misleading. There are over 18200 packages in the
Debian distribution, those packages are stable or they wouldn't be
there. But to say they're unfinished, as if it were a problem exclusive
to Linux, is unfair. Projects get superceded or become redundant, that
is why they get abandoned. If a project for which there is demand gets
abandoned by it's originator then, because of the GNU Public License,
others are able to pick it up and evolve it. You certainly don't get the
situation, which you do under the proprietary system, where the
software originators abandon it or go bust and leave their users high
and dry.

Whether software is *ever* finished is estremely debatable. If Windows
3.1 was finished, why was there the need for 95? If 95 was finished why
did we need 98? Is Adobe PageMaker finished? I doubt it, it's still been
abandoned though, and users can choose to stick with it (if it'll run
under Vista) or they've got to upgrade to InDesign.

Your remarks regarding open source software are throwaway, the software
is worth so much more than that remark.


If LINUX
ever got organised under one umbrella, Vista would have never been
written.

It has been tried. But people want different things from their software
and so they do it a different way, and they can do so freely, they
have both the tools and the source code, you only have to see how many
different Linux distributions are listed at distrowatch.com (199 so far).
Try doing that with Windows.

Sorry, got a bit OT there. It's something I'm quite passionate about and
it's easy to get carried away. Normal service will now be resumed.

Justin.

--
Justin C, by the sea.

Justin C wrote in
:

In what way is OS X a closed
environment? You get free development tools with the OS, more than can
be said for Windows. Also, it's based on Unix, which is far more stable
than anything MS has produced so far ... and they've had plenty of time
and $deity knows how much money to throw at the problem. As a multi-
user
environment it's second to none, program install and removal is better
the MS, no registry to foul up, and no stray files around your system.


You said OS X. I said MAC. Apple has a long history of trying to keep
the hackers from developing software for Apple Computers that the company
sold. They used to go after them with lawyers. Has that changed?

Windows sucks. It always has. But, alas, Windows is the OS most of the
software is written for, not MAC, for the above reason. I'm not sure of
its current statistic, but It's probably 98 to 1?? You don't have to beg
to find 24 widgee programs for XP. www.tucows.com, www.download.com, and
a hundred others. "Do they make this for the MAC?", is the next question
the left-out MAC owners ask. I've seen it for years and years.

They finally came out with Skype for MAC. It's still in beta. It needs:

System requirements
Mac computer with G4 800 Mhz processor or faster.
Mac OS X v10.3.9 Panther or later.
512 MB RAM.
40 MB free disk space on your hard drive.
Microphone.
Webcam: suggested webcams include Apple iSight, Philips SPC900NC, or
Logitech QuickCam Pro 4000. Drivers for the Philips and Logitech webcams
can be downloaded from http://webcam-osx.sourceforge.net/.
Internet connection (broadband is best, GPRS is not supported for voice
calls, and results may vary on a satellite connection).

Why does it need X v10.3.9 Panter or later? What was wrong with 10.3.8
and before?? Why are so FEW drivers written that will work with the
cameras? Why doesn't APPLE come with drivers for every camera at Circuit
City...by default?? Why do I have to go to sourceforge hackers for a
camera driver? Why do only CERTAIN cameras work? Why is this not
supported or that not supported, every time you see some program ported
to a MAC? I buy a camera/USB anything or something for a Windows
computer...plug it into XP...it works, 99% of the time. I don't have to
ask will THIS camera work on a Gateway? What version of XP do it need
10.3.9 Panther or will v9.2.1 work?

I use this skype information as just an example. There's
thousands....why? Why doesn't MAC come with MAC drivers for every camera
produced, every hard drive, every mouse? Why?

Apple bull****....that's why. It's always been that way.

You asked......(c;

I ran LINUX on 2 computers for a long time. There ARE very good Linux
softwares, even ones never quite ready-for-issue. LINUX, itself, is
quite stable, but, of course, it helps if you're familiar with root
commands even if you have a working gui. LINUX, for example, expects to
find things in certain places. It doesn't PLACE them where it wants. It
expects YOU to know where to place them so it can find them...just as an
example. This makes it unusable to most computer USERS, who know little
about the OS, its quirks, its structure. They are USERS. They are also
car USERS. They know nothing of the cars ABS brake system. They are not
mechanics...or electrical engineers...or combustion engineers. They are
USERS...same idea.

Of course, LINUX suffers from the same thing MAC does. The softwares you
want are WINDOWS programs, 99% of them. No LINUX porting? No LINUX
operation unless you use PINE or some other emulator that just gobbles
resources doing the conversion. You gotta give Billy credit. He trumped
them with his crappy OS and it STUCK.

Larry
--
BTW, I'm no Windows lover...at all! I use it because it runs the
softwares I want to use...just like everyone else.

Ok, back to boats....sorry for the intrusion.

In article , Larry wrote:
Justin C wrote in
:

In what way is OS X a closed
environment? You get free development tools with the OS, more than can
be said for Windows. Also, it's based on Unix, which is far more stable
than anything MS has produced so far ... and they've had plenty of time
and $deity knows how much money to throw at the problem. As a multi-
user
environment it's second to none, program install and removal is better
the MS, no registry to foul up, and no stray files around your system.


You said OS X. I said MAC. Apple has a long history of trying to keep
the hackers from developing software for Apple Computers that the company
sold. They used to go after them with lawyers. Has that changed?

I've not used Macs prior to OS X, but a quick Google for OS 9 shareware
found many hundreds of small apps and utilities, the sort, I assume, you
consider are made by the hacker community. It's difficult to find stuff
for earlier versions, everything either being updated for new versions
or not being highly ranked by Google for whatever reason.


Windows sucks. It always has. But, alas, Windows is the OS most of the
software is written for, not MAC, for the above reason. I'm not sure of
its current statistic, but It's probably 98 to 1?? You don't have to beg
to find 24 widgee programs for XP. www.tucows.com, www.download.com, and
a hundred others. "Do they make this for the MAC?", is the next question
the left-out MAC owners ask. I've seen it for years and years.

OS statistics aren't too easy to come by either. The last I heard was
something like Windows 93%, OS X 5% and Linux 2%[1]. The sites that
display statistics based on bowser supplied information use flawed data,
many people using OS software set their browsers up to spoof both
browser and OS. This is necessary because there are an awful lot of
broken web sites, that if you visit with anything other than Windows and
IE will only show you a page with links to upgrade your browser.

WRT software availability, there's not much you can't do with either a
Mac or a Linux box. It may not be written by the same people but it'll
do the same job.


They finally came out with Skype for MAC. It's still in beta. It needs:

System requirements
Mac computer with G4 800 Mhz processor or faster.
Mac OS X v10.3.9 Panther or later.
512 MB RAM.
40 MB free disk space on your hard drive.
Microphone.
Webcam: suggested webcams include Apple iSight, Philips SPC900NC, or
Logitech QuickCam Pro 4000. Drivers for the Philips and Logitech webcams
can be downloaded from http://webcam-osx.sourceforge.net/.
Internet connection (broadband is best, GPRS is not supported for voice
calls, and results may vary on a satellite connection).

Why does it need X v10.3.9 Panter or later?

There were updates to the underlying webkit that came in with that
version. If the writers of Skype for OS X wanted it to work on earlier
versions they'd have had to write more of the code themselves, with
10.3.9 they were able to take advantage of what was already in place
from Apple.


Why are so FEW drivers written that will work with the
cameras?

An awful lot of cameras work with OS X, they just happen to recommend
the cameras you mentioned. No one said that other cameras won't work.
Now, if that was a "required" line, as opposed to "recommended"...


Why doesn't APPLE come with drivers for every camera at Circuit
City...by default??

It's not up to the OS to provide drivers, it's up to the hardware
manufacturer.


Why do I have to go to sourceforge hackers for a
camera driver?

See above.


Why do only CERTAIN cameras work?

See above.

Why is this not
supported or that not supported, every time you see some program ported
to a MAC?

I have not idea what you're referring to here. I've no trouble with
Adobe CS 2, XChat, Google Earth, DreamWeaver, OpenOffice, slrn. All of
which are available on at least two platforms. Those are the apps I use
which aren't Mac only, so I can't comment on any others.


I buy a camera/USB anything or something for a Windows
computer...plug it into XP...it works, 99% of the time.

You try plugging it into Vista. A USB camera might not be much of an
issue, but anything that can even vaguely come into DRM data can cripple
your system.


Apple bull****....that's why. It's always been that way.

They ****ed you off, big time, eh?


I ran LINUX on 2 computers for a long time. There ARE very good Linux
softwares, even ones never quite ready-for-issue. LINUX, itself, is
quite stable, but, of course, it helps if you're familiar with root
commands even if you have a working gui. LINUX, for example, expects to
find things in certain places. It doesn't PLACE them where it wants. It
expects YOU to know where to place them so it can find them...just as an
example. This makes it unusable to most computer USERS, who know little
about the OS, its quirks, its structure. They are USERS. They are also
car USERS. They know nothing of the cars ABS brake system. They are not
mechanics...or electrical engineers...or combustion engineers. They are
USERS...same idea.

I know what you mean. Things are improving, and in some instances are
very good. It depends what you require from your system. MS gets you so
tied up with proprietary formats that you can't move to another OS and
still read your data (easily, there is always a way, but the hoops are
many). If your data is in mostly open formats you may like to try Linux
again, Ubuntu is very popular at the moment, and it's very highly rated,
has excellent hardware detection/support. It can manage most of your MS
format data, be it video or word documents.


You gotta give Billy credit. He trumped
them with his crappy OS and it STUCK.

It's going to take a while but the OS war is over. With the migration to
web applications the OS is going to become irrelevant, providing you've
got a browser, your access to your software will be over a broadband
connection. If you store your data with someone like Google you'll be
able to work where ever you have an internet connection, Palm,
Blackberry, OS X, Linux, Windows, OS2, Amiga, whatever; we're moving on.

Justin.

[1] It's all, lies, damn lies, and statistics anyway

PS. Please, it's Mac, not MAC, it's not an acronym. The same goes for
Linux.
--
Justin C, by the sea.

On Apr 21, 6:47 pm, Larry wrote:

They finally came out with Skype for MAC. It's still in beta. It needs:

Larry

Hey Larry, When you going to Host a Skype Cast?

Ive been stumbling around Skype since, I think maybe, you mentioned
it here. Lots of Brazilians, Bulgarians, Aussies, and arabs. Who'd a
thought.

Was it you who did that one time Everything Boat skype cast a few
months ago?

Bob

"Roger Long" wrote in message
...

I may have other reasons now for having a new laptop on board and you
can't get one without Vista. --
Roger Long

Dell is now offering laptops with XP installed :-)

Justin C wrote in
:

Apple bull****....that's why. It's always been that way.

They ****ed you off, big time, eh?



Not me. I never bought Apple because I'm not going to wait months to years
for an Apple port of software Windows always runs FIRST. It's the only
reason to use Windows....The software is written for Windows (93% you
said), then, eventually, it MIGHT, not will, be ported to other, less
popular OSs, like MAC, Linux, BeOS, Palm, CP/M, Fortran, Unix, PS/2, OS-
65U, etc, etc, etc....



Larry
--

Bob wrote in news:1177259599.955127.320670
@y5g2000hsa.googlegroups.com:

Hey Larry, When you going to Host a Skype Cast?



I tried it twice, but was inundated with connections from kiddies, not
boaters. There's no way to stop them I can see. It was a dismal failure.

Larry
--