Freesat 109 started.

"Bob Latham" wrote in message
...
: In article ,
: Jerry wrote:
:
: "Bob Latham" wrote in message
: ...
: : In article ,
: : Jerry wrote:
: :
: snip
: :
: : So is your trolling...
: :
: : I'm sorry I've never done that.
:
: Oh yes you do, either that or you are truly clueless. :~(
:
: Please explain what makes you think I'm clueless.

Well you seem to be saying that you can't read English, of course
if English is not your native language then I apologise.

:
: And also why you, not being able to quote properly and not
prepared to do
: anything about it, doesn't mean that about you.
:

You seem to be under the impression that I work for Microsoft!
--
Regards, Jerry.

"Richard Lamont" wrote in message
...
: On 06/11/10 12:07, Jerry wrote:
:
: : Nobody's perfect. Every OS has its own little
irritations.
: Why, for
: : instance, does the Ubuntu Update Manager always say "Your
: system is up to
: : date" before you've even told it to check?
: :
: : Mine says "Your system is up-to-date", and below it, "The
: package
: : information was updated less than one hour ago."
: :
: : Sometimes you have to read *both* lines of text to get all
the
: information!
: :
:
: But what if there has been an update since, is the system
still
: up to date, if not is that massage not misleading?...
:
: Would it not be better for it to say "Your system was last
: updated less than one hour ago".
:
: No. The *system* wasn't updated less than hour ago. The package
database
: - i.e. data about available packages and their dependencies -
was
: updated less than an hour ago.
:

Then it is even more of a lie for it to say "Your system is
up-to-date"!...
--
Regards, Jerry.

In article , Jerry
wrote:

"Jim Lesurf" wrote in message
...
: In article , Tony Quinn

: Perhaps you can define what you mean by "running" here? I'm
curious to
: know why someone who does something like runs Ubuntu and
then just uses
: it for simple domestic tasks like web browsing and writing
letters
: would *have* to need knowlege of what you refer to as "the
CML".
:
: Possibly meaning the CLI?
:
: Yes, I thought it likely that the reference made to "the CML"
did mean
: something like "command line" typed into and "interface" - i.e.
something
: like a terminal. :-)
:
: But that does not answer my actual question. So I'm hoping
Jerry can
: clarify.

Yes it has,

Which "it" "has" what?

as I have pointed out, other than for specific IP config
reasons, I have never HAD to use the CLI (or have knowledge of it) since
the last time I used an 286 box running DOS 5 well over ten years ago,
unlike with Linux in the years since...

I appreciate that you may have had to use the command line when using linux
for your own purposes. But that doesn't deal with my previous question
about what you said before.

Since you/your agent seems to have snipped and mangled the earlier comments
you made I'll re-insert the item I was asking about to ensure clarity.

You wrote:

On 05 Nov in uk.tech.digital-tv, Jerry
wrote:

Also, sorry to say but, running any flavour of Linux still requires
knowledge of the CML.

Note the sweeping nature of this assertion about *any* "flavour of Linux"
and *requires*. You made no qualifications as to the nature of the task
being performed by the user. Nor even defined "running".

My question was then as below:

On 06 Nov in uk.tech.digital-tv, Jim Lesurf wrote:

Perhaps you can define what you mean by "running" here? I'm curious to
know why someone who does something like runs Ubuntu and then just uses
it for simple domestic tasks like web browsing and writing letters would
*have* to need knowlege of what you refer to as "the CML".

Can you now deal with my actual question?

Slainte,

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Armstrong Audio http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

On Friday, November 5th, 2010 at 21:32:54h +0000, Jerry wrote:

Is that the system that was 'hacked' earlier this week, causing the LSEx
to shut down for some/all of the day?...

No, that was not the system (Millenium System) which you described as
'hacked', nor was the system (Turquoise Trading) 'hacked'.

From

http://www.computerweekly.COM/Articles/2010/11/05/243776/London-Stock-Exchange-problem-was-network-change-mix.htm

QUOTE

London Stock Exchange problem was network change mix up

KarlÂ*FlindersÂ* Friday 05 November 2010 19:48

The two-hour disruption experienced by the London Stock Exchange's
Turquoise multilateral trading facility (MTF) this week was the
result of an error by a contractor when making a small network
change, according to a source close to the company.

Speculation has been rife that a contractor was to blame when the
Turquoise network went down last Tuesday, 2 November.

A source close to the exchange said that a contractor had
mistakenly put a network change into the live environment
rather than the test environment.

"It was pure human error," said the source.

The London Stock Exchange declined to comment.

The migration of the London Stock Exchange to MillenniumIT,
planned for next month, will now be put back following the disruption.

UNQUOTE

Incidentally, NYSE Euronext have been successfully running their trading system
on Red Hat Linux since 2008 or so.

On Sat, 06 Nov 2010 08:20:43 +0000, Richard Lamont
wrote:

Nobody's perfect. Every OS has its own little irritations. Why, for
instance, does the Ubuntu Update Manager always say "Your system is up to
date" before you've even told it to check?

Mine says "Your system is up-to-date", and below it, "The package
information was updated less than one hour ago."

Sometimes you have to read *both* lines of text to get all the information!

It's still a complete lie.
It says "The package information was updated less than
one hour ago" when it patently hasn't been checked, because if you select
the Check option it goes away and downloads a load of package info. type
stuff, which it doesn't do when first started.
Other implementations check automatically on startup and don't give
misleading messages, but not Ubuntu.

On 06/11/10 15:16, Jerry wrote:

So you are not forcing yourself to use Linux then, if you can
switch to XP when ever the going get tough, your principles seem
to be made of cheese, when it gets to warm they start melting and
running all over the place.

Ah, so you beleive that, unless I ditch Windows *entirely* and use
nothing but Linux, regardless of how much hardship that might cause me,
then it's not worth doing anything at-all? That's a really puzzling
attitude. I'm quite happy with using Linux 99% of the time. Still, I
guess I'm just not principled enough for you then. Ho-hum. I'll do my
best not to lose any sleep over it.


The fact that you're going out of your way to assume that I'm
: some sort of rabid Microsoft hater says a lot more about you
than it
: does about me.

I have merely been reflecting what you have said, or at least
implied, yourself.

And your imagination did the rest. Yep. I see.



:
: or stand your ground and not do what you need to do
:
: Your assumptions about me are getting more outrageous by the
word...

Whilst the duel standards of your principles, forcing yourself to
use Linux - not, are becoming more obvious by the posting!

You really are taking this *massively* too seriously.

:
: - and what if
: that meant not feeding your family cos' your principles are
: bigger that your common sense...
:
: Now you're just being completely preposterous.

No, deadly serious, some people earn their living from their
computers, as has been said by others, for them the OS is just a
tool, principles don't enter the decision making process.

Deadly serious? Not feeding my family? It's baffling!


:
: There were competitors to MS back in the 1990s, IBM and
Apple-Mac
: are the most obvious, but there were others, Sun Microsystems
and
: RISC to name but two, other than specialised applications
none of
: them cut the mustard - not Microsoft's fault...
:
: You'll have to point out to me where you think I said that it
was
: Microsoft's fault. Please *please* try to keep your imagination
in check.


Perhaps this "I agree. Nothing can really compete with Windows'
strangle-hold on the
industry." or "I wonder what the computer industry would look
like now if Microsoft hadn't been able achieve such supremacy",
perhaps even a later comment "The thought of poking Bill Gates
in the eye is what got me here".

So if it wasn't the fault of MS, why are you so rabid towards
them?

I'm struggling to find the rabidness (rabidity?) to be honest.

Microsoft *do* have a strangle-hold on the industry. They *have*
achieved supremacy How does stating simple facts make me rabid?

The bit about poking Bill Gates in the eye was meant to be
tongue-in-cheek. I'm surprised it confused you, but I'm happy to set the
record straight now. If I met Bill Gates, I almost certainly wouldn't
try to poke him in the eye.

:
: : Quite the opposite on both counts - and Windows' domination
of
: the
: : marketplace is to blame. It's one way in which Microsoft is
: strangling
: : the industry.
:
: No, the software companies are only responding to the market,
the
: same market that chose MS, there is nothing to stop - for
: example - Adobe or Sony porting their video/audio software
for
: Linux, indeed I have often said that Sony's Vegas and Sound
Forge
: software etc. would be the perfect products to port to Linux
and
: sell complete with a honed Linux OS as a complete package,
have
: you ever stopped to wondered why they don't?...
:
: My point exactly. Once again you're making completely incorrect
: assumptions about my views.

No, you are mixing up your own views, you appear to be objecting
to "monopolies" but then expect rock steady
hardware/applications.

I do indeed think monopolies are a bad thing. Where did you get the
stuff about rock steady applications from? I prefer my applications to
be firm, but I'm happy for them to sway slightly from side to side now
and again.


By being in the position they are, Microsoft
: can't really avoid stifling competition. They don't have to be
: malevolent to do it, they just have to exist as the
overwhelmingly
: dominant company.

Sony Vegas could be ported for Linux, if Sony do so it will have
nothing to do with what MS think or want - that said if Sony
wanted to port of the Apple-Mac platform then that *would* have
everything to do with Apple Inc.

What does this have to do with your inability to understand my reasons
for running Linux?


If you think the world would be a better place with
: Sound Forge running on Linux, then maybe those of us who value
and
: support competition in the market are acting very slightly in
your
: interests.

Far from it, the problem with Linux is that, as I have said
before, there are far to many versions, I can just hear the
complaints already if Vages was ported and made to run on (say)
Open Suse but was then found not to run on either (say) Ubuntu or
Fedora. There is as much descent amongst Linux users towards
other flavours of Linux as many Linux users have against
MS/Windows collectively, such decent would soon show its head if
a major program worked on one but not another, just think if Open
Office was like that.

You keep going off on these rants as though you think something needs
explaining to me. Once again, what does this have to do with your
repeated misinterpretation of my views?

:
:
: : Switching operating systems is indeed very trivial
nowadays.
: I'd have
: : done it even if it was much more effort than it actually
turned
: out to be.
: :
:
: Fine, bully for you, but what exactly do you use your
computer
: for, yes any fool could switch to Linux today if all they
need to
: do is surf the web, word process, write a spreadsheet -
:
: I don't often do much more than that. Do you imagine I'm
somehow unusual
: in that respect? I can't help thinking that the vast majority
of home
: PCs are used in a very similar way to mine.

But the majority of computers are not in the home, and most
people want to use the same OS/programs as they use at
work/college, indeed some might have to.

Yet again, after being told repeatedly what my position really is, you
*still* cling doggedly to the belief that I've somehow said everyone
should switch to Linux regardless of how much pain it causes them. It
really defies reason.

:
: if that
: is all I needed to do I would probably be posting here using
a
: Linux box to - principles are fine but at the end of the day
: serious 'work' needs to get done and principles alone don't
get
: it done always.
:
: So you agree with me that *if it's easily done* then switching
to Linux
: on principle makes good sense. It just turns out that it's not
easy for
: you. That's fine. I never suggested that you should switch. I
have

As I said, if all you want to use your computer for is basic word
processing, spread sheets or (the cross-platform) web-surfing
then it doesn't really matter what OS you choose.

And, as I've said, over and over again, that's not far off the position
I'm in.


: absolutely no idea where you got the ridiculous impression that
I think
: it's a good idea to make big sacrifices in order to switch.
:

I suggest that you re read what you have posted then, you might
not have meant to imply what you have but I'm not the only person
who took your words to mean what you now say you didn't mean...

Only one person has needed my position clarifying more than once. The
first post of mine that you replied to already contained a full
explanation, so I was surprised to find myself explaining it all again -
and then again, and now yet again. It *has* to be deliberate. What I
can't fathom is your reason for doing it.

Cheers,

Colin.

Richard Lamont wrote:

Ubuntu Update Manager gives you a GUI with three buttons to click:

1. Check
2. Install updates
3. Close.

It's simpler and quicker than Windows Update. What's more, it does all
the apps as well as the OS.

I wonder what you mean by "simpler and quicker". With W7 you don't get
a button at all if your system is up to date.

On the other hand, it does have five links on the left hand side:

Check for updates
Change settings
View update history
Restore hidden updates
Updates: frequently asked questions

It's actually quite useful to be able to get to these so conveniently.
As well as checking for updates manually, "Change settings" lets me
fine tune exactly how and when my system gets updated - very useful.

Also, the ability to view the update history is occasionally useful.

Anyway, I'm just saying that the update system in W7 is a good
combination of extreme simplicity at the top level, whilst providing
you with additional information and control if you want it.

I use both OSs, and regard this as a narrow win for W7, due to the way
those extra facilities are presented.

SteveT

PS: W7's update system will update all Microsoft products, not just the
OS. Obviously not as comprehensive as Linux update coverage.

On Saturday, November 6th, 2010 at 02:47:44h +0100, Alan P wrote:

Also, Her Majesty's Revenue & Customs runs both the PAYE
& Self Assessment income tax systems on Linux systems.

Are you sure about that? Or has it changed?

To the best of my understanding they were running on
Sun Solaris (Unix System V derivative) systems.

PAYE & Self-Assessment systems are ( ICL ) VME systems, which now run
as an application on Sun Suse Enterprise Linux boxes.

"Bob Latham" wrote in message
...
: In article ,
: Jerry wrote:
:
: "Bob Latham" wrote in message
: ...
: : In article ,
: : Jerry wrote:
: :
: : "Bob Latham" wrote in message
: : ...
: : : In article ,
: : : Jerry wrote:
: : :
: : snip
: : :
: : : So is your trolling...
: : :
: : : I'm sorry I've never done that.
: :
: : Oh yes you do, either that or you are truly clueless. :~(
: :
: : Please explain what makes you think I'm clueless.
:
: Well you seem to be saying that you can't read English, of
course
: if English is not your native language then I apologise.
:
: No answer then.

Because there is nothing for me to answer, you can either read
the text or you can't, which is it?

:
: :
: : And also why you, not being able to quote properly and not
: prepared to do
: : anything about it, doesn't mean that about you.
: :
:
: You seem to be under the impression that I work for
Microsoft!
:
: The thought hadn't crossed my mind actually.
:

So why did you suggest that I could fix their software problem!
--
Regards, Jerry.

In message , Bob Latham
writes:
In article ,
J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
[]
Just as an interesting complement to that: one of the things that
confused my mother (and some others I've taught), who was a very
intelligent person but came to computing later in life, was the fact
that there are actually so many ways to do a lot of things in Windows
and most Windows softwa the keyboard way and the mouse way, for a
start.

Fair comment, in that respect there are numerous ways to do things you
want. A constant problem for me is things that are only available via
keyboard shortcuts which for infrequent users is hard to remember.

(Very few app.s have _only_ keyboard shortcuts - they're usually there
under a menu, though often far from intuitive, sometimes a few levels
buried in menus or similar. Not that I'm saying there aren't
keyboard-only functions. Of course, this is application-specific, not
OS-specific.)

But I don't mean how to perform a simple function, I meant doing the whole
thing in a different way. eg. There is little or no concept of saving a
block of data. Say you had an area of a document high-lighted, why is
there not an option to save the block as another file. Yes, I know you can
do it by pasting into a clean document etc. but that is less efficient and
counter intuitive.
[]
Again, I have encountered a few cases where you _can_ highlight a block
and save it, though I agree they're rare. (Isn't there also - in XP
onwards - the concept of a "snippet" or "fragment" or some word like
that? Never having used them, I don't know much about them, but remember
the concept when I first looked at XP. IIRR, the concept was introduced
in the context of saving them to the desktop.)
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G.5AL-IS-P--Ch++(p)[email protected]+Sh0!:`)DNAf

People wear anoraks because it's cold outside and it rains, not to annoy the
editors of style magazines. - Ben Elton, Radio Times 18-24 April 1998