Wayne.B wrote:
On Mon, 29 Oct 2007 19:37:04 -0400, " JimH" ask wrote:

Do you see the same trend Harry? Precious! ;-)

Oh, and yes, that *was* so very precious! ;-) :-)
You are really losing it John. Time for another snot nosed brat filled
Disney cruise? ;-)

Knock it off guys, it's getting tiresome.


Oh? Are you back to "leading by example" again, or is this just a
temporary pause until you and Reggie start playing "Who's the Best
Snark?" again?

Just curious, because for a couple of weeks just about everyone was
behaving properly, except for you, Reggie, and a few of the lost-cause
imbeciles who hang out here. Even Herring was being nice.

HK wrote:
JimH wrote:
"Wayne.B" wrote in message
news
On Mon, 29 Oct 2007 15:04:39 -0400, HK wrote:

VISTA isn't slow if you are running the right processor and an
appropriate amount of memory for the applications you use.
You really shouldn't need a state-of-the-art, multi-core, multi
processor, 2 Gig PC just to support the operating system, although I
have to admit that IBM has frequently moved in that direction. Today's
VISTA compatible PCs have more hardware resources available to them
than a corporate mainframe computer 15 years ago. To do what? Browse
the web, type EMAILs, run spreadsheets, play music....

Ridiculous.


"640k of memory should be enough for anybody"
Bill Gates, circa 1981

If you haven't already, don't waste $$$ on MS Office 2007. Also, when
you add programs, VISTA asks you every time if you really want to do
this. You can shut this off, but you ought to leave it on for a few
weeks so you have an idea of some of the intracacies of the OS.

Most of us spell intricacies correctly.

BAR wrote:
HK wrote:
JimH wrote:
"Wayne.B" wrote in message
news On Mon, 29 Oct 2007 15:04:39 -0400, HK wrote:

VISTA isn't slow if you are running the right processor and an
appropriate amount of memory for the applications you use.
You really shouldn't need a state-of-the-art, multi-core, multi
processor, 2 Gig PC just to support the operating system, although I
have to admit that IBM has frequently moved in that direction. Today's
VISTA compatible PCs have more hardware resources available to them
than a corporate mainframe computer 15 years ago. To do what? Browse
the web, type EMAILs, run spreadsheets, play music....

Ridiculous.


"640k of memory should be enough for anybody"
Bill Gates, circa 1981

If you haven't already, don't waste $$$ on MS Office 2007. Also, when
you add programs, VISTA asks you every time if you really want to do
this. You can shut this off, but you ought to leave it on for a few
weeks so you have an idea of some of the intracacies of the OS.

Most of us spell intricacies correctly.


Bert A. Robbins, of Rockville, chimes in...
He's the self-taught IT guy.

On Mon, 29 Oct 2007 21:45:53 -0400, HK wrote:

Just curious, because for a couple of weeks just about everyone was
behaving properly, except for you, Reggie, and a few of the lost-cause
imbeciles who hang out here. Even Herring was being nice.

Everbody gets their turn, then it's time to stop.

You to.

Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Mon, 29 Oct 2007 20:42:40 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Mon, 29 Oct 2007 18:37:45 -0400, HK wrote:

Old Wayne sounds like those losing control IT managers of the mid 1980s
who were terrified by PCs because they meant that users could kind of do
things their way instead of his way.
Oh no, just because I managed large corporate systems, I never had
that mentality although there are certainly some who do. I've been
dabbling in home computers for a long time, well before the IBM PC,
MS/DOS, etc. My first was actually a DIY project using a board level
engineering prototype called the SC/MP. It was made by National
Advanced Systems back in the 70s and was programmed in hexadecimal
machine language via a keypad device. Those were the days. Of
course it didn't do much compared to what we now have. My first
"boxed" home computer was the Commodore VIC-20 which used an audio
cassette for input/output. It had a decent Basic compiler and could
do some useful things. Well before all of that I had a TI-59
programmable hand held with all the bells and whistles. It was an
amazing device in its day.

Oh man does that bring back memories.

When I was in high school, the Math Club used to work at the Sylvania
plant over in Danvers "programming" one of their computers - with
phone jacks of all things.

My wife claims to be a mathlete when she was in high school. Alternate
for the It's Academic team too.

My first exposure to the mini-computer was a Digital Research CP/M
machine working with the IBM P/LM compiler. From there it was a few
home built computers that essentially did nothing more than play Lunar
Lander, Kingdom and Collassal Cave. Used to bootstrap the earlier
computers eventually moving the paper tape which I found at a ham flea
market.

I really liked programing in P/L M, P/L 1, P/L M86. Great languages.

Proably the most fun computer was the VIC-20 and when I upgraded to
the Commodore 64 I was in hog heaven - man, could I do some stuff with
that. It still runs.

You should donate it to a computer museum.

HK wrote:
BAR wrote:
HK wrote:
JimH wrote:
"Wayne.B" wrote in message
news On Mon, 29 Oct 2007 15:04:39 -0400, HK wrote:

VISTA isn't slow if you are running the right processor and an
appropriate amount of memory for the applications you use.
You really shouldn't need a state-of-the-art, multi-core, multi
processor, 2 Gig PC just to support the operating system, although I
have to admit that IBM has frequently moved in that direction. Today's
VISTA compatible PCs have more hardware resources available to them
than a corporate mainframe computer 15 years ago. To do what? Browse
the web, type EMAILs, run spreadsheets, play music....

Ridiculous.


"640k of memory should be enough for anybody"
Bill Gates, circa 1981

If you haven't already, don't waste $$$ on MS Office 2007. Also, when
you add programs, VISTA asks you every time if you really want to do
this. You can shut this off, but you ought to leave it on for a few
weeks so you have an idea of some of the intracacies of the OS.

Most of us spell intricacies correctly.


Bert A. Robbins, of Rockville, chimes in...
He's the self-taught IT guy.

You still have my file, but you have done a poor job of keeping it up to
date. You are slipping Krause.

BTW, any pictures of your 36' Zimmerman like Lobsta' boat?

BAR wrote:
HK wrote:
BAR wrote:
HK wrote:
JimH wrote:
"Wayne.B" wrote in message
news On Mon, 29 Oct 2007 15:04:39 -0400, HK
wrote:

VISTA isn't slow if you are running the right processor and an
appropriate amount of memory for the applications you use.
You really shouldn't need a state-of-the-art, multi-core, multi
processor, 2 Gig PC just to support the operating system, although I
have to admit that IBM has frequently moved in that direction.
Today's
VISTA compatible PCs have more hardware resources available to them
than a corporate mainframe computer 15 years ago. To do what? Browse
the web, type EMAILs, run spreadsheets, play music....

Ridiculous.


"640k of memory should be enough for anybody"
Bill Gates, circa 1981

If you haven't already, don't waste $$$ on MS Office 2007. Also,
when you add programs, VISTA asks you every time if you really want
to do this. You can shut this off, but you ought to leave it on for
a few weeks so you have an idea of some of the intracacies of the OS.

Most of us spell intricacies correctly.


Bert A. Robbins, of Rockville, chimes in...
He's the self-taught IT guy.

You still have my file, but you have done a poor job of keeping it up to
date. You are slipping Krause.

BTW, any pictures of your 36' Zimmerman like Lobsta' boat?

Lots of pictures.

Rockville, Damascus, Gaithersburg...one of those crowded 'burbs, right?
I mean, I can't tell them apart.

I didn't make the BAR-Robbins connection until you revealed yourself as
the "self-made" IT go-fer.

On Tue, 30 Oct 2007 01:29:17 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:

Proably the most fun computer was the VIC-20 and when I upgraded to
the Commodore 64 I was in hog heaven - man, could I do some stuff with
that. It still runs.

Yes, and it was a great glass teletype for logging onto Compuserve and
some of the early Bulletin Board systems. Those were the days. Look
how far we've come and how little has changed. :-) I once caught
something resembling a virus on the "64".

There used to be a company that offered a service close to universal
connectivity. You dialed into one number and from there you could
connect to a variety of different systems. Can't remember the name of
it but at the time it seemed like a great concept. Old stuff to those
on the old ARPANET I suppose.

On Mon, 29 Oct 2007 21:46:43 -0400, " JimH" ask wrote:

Lead by example Wayne...........something we can all do.

Yes *we* could.

If you can straighten out Harry I'll tackle everyone else.

Wayne.B wrote:
On Tue, 30 Oct 2007 01:29:17 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:

Proably the most fun computer was the VIC-20 and when I upgraded to
the Commodore 64 I was in hog heaven - man, could I do some stuff with
that. It still runs.

Yes, and it was a great glass teletype for logging onto Compuserve and
some of the early Bulletin Board systems. Those were the days. Look
how far we've come and how little has changed. :-) I once caught
something resembling a virus on the "64".

There used to be a company that offered a service close to universal
connectivity. You dialed into one number and from there you could
connect to a variety of different systems. Can't remember the name of
it but at the time it seemed like a great concept. Old stuff to those
on the old ARPANET I suppose.


I used to dial into the actual NSA from a phone number assigned to me as
an outside contractor. When we moved to North Florida, I was assigned a
phone number there. It was only good for email and some controlled
message boards, but it was kinda fun.

In the 1980s, I was a partner in a rather infamous dial up chat board
that started out with four incoming phone lines, grew to eight, then 16,
then 32. That was even more fun. This was 1984 or so, I think. Maybe a
year later.