HP, sad

On Fri, 18 Sep 2015 13:29:12 -0400, krw Gave us:

Don't confuse them with the facts.

I don't seem to run into them. ;-) I did use a text editor last week because the HR folks created an unusable app for our performance plans and I had to edit them outside, then copy the test to the app. Before that, I bet it's been a year since I used a straight text editor.

On Fri, 18 Sep 2015 19:49:51 -0400, krw Gave us:

So, you have never read a "readme" file or changes file for a new piece of software?

Figures that you haven't actually laid your hands on anything new lately.

Hell, even a Tektronix DSO firmware upgrade has text files to be read, and their online pages do as well.

I don't read them in an editor, DimBulb. I have no need to edit a "readme" file.

Actually, I don't just use things because they're new. A lot of the software I use has the automatic updates turned off.

Don't have a Tektronix anything anymore. We use mostly Agilent scopes. The only text files I've seen are displayed on the scope itself. Everything else is a PDF. Considering how pervasive PDF software is, why would anyone distribute text readme files?

On Fri, 18 Sep 2015 23:18:51 -0400, krw Gave us:

Considering that most applets meant to view a text file are also capable of entering into an edit capacity, that is a pretty unlearned remark.

This has nothing to do with automatic updates or automatic update settings.

Yeah, and since neither is an online device your remark about automatic updates was about as lame as it gets.

The de facto std for a document is a pdf. The de facto standard for included files related to a software update or upgrade or a firmware upgrade is a std text file.

I spend a lot of quality time with xx, mostly writing LaTeX and coding.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

One problem with early programs written for a virtual memory system was that the programs could use memory freely and the OS VM will nicely map it into the much larger disk storage behind your back. Unfortunately disk speed was then and is now much slower than real RAM. Even today, performance on Win systems seems to drop drastically with just with 1.5 to 2 time combined virtual memory claim compared to installed physical memory.

A virtual memory system has much more overhead to a simple overlay loader like MS-DOS, leaving less physical memory to the real application with the same amount of physical memory (less than 1 MiB in the early days).

With minicomputer memory prices much higher than PC memory prices, the VAX memory size was often well below optimum values.

I did a lot of C development in those days, on many different computer systems, and I can tell you that even when using the same environment (e.g. the PC under MSDOS, or an Atari ST) the Turbo C compilers were an order of magnitude faster at doing the same job than the competitors of that age (Microsoft, Aztec, Mark Williams, and Unix PCC).

This affected the VAX-PC comparison because on the VAX we used the VMS compilers, of which the C compiler also was a bad example, and on the PC we used Turbo C which was very fast.

This made the VAX, which already had poor CPU performance compared to a PC of that age, come out even worse.

The virtual memory thing of course is true, but I don't think it was the main reason for poor compiler performance. That was just caused by poor coding and/or the use of inefficient frameworks for compiler building.

And, I believe she had her fingers in eviscerating Bell Labs. The revenues were increased by cutting fat, all right, for some definition of fat.

To wit: if Ms. Fiorina is serious about destroying Planned Parenthood, she should become its CEO.

On Sun, 20 Sep 2015 20:00:18 +0000 (UTC), Przemek Klosowski Gave us:

If you actually read it, you would find that the Lucent/alcatel merger that went south was not commandeered by her.

I have two books, The HP Way by David Packard, and The Way Forward by Fiorina. Dave's book is great. Carly's is a cartoon PowerPoint thing, sort of like a kid's coloring book. I estimate that is has 1% of the content of Dave's. Or less.

She sounds good, but Obama sounded good. That's a distinct talent.

Any chance we can get Mitt to run again?

Mitt was awful at explaining himself. I went door to door explaining that Mitt wasn't cutting "billionaires'" taxes, he wanted to collect the same $$ from the same people, but with a simpler system permitting a lower marginal rate.

An explanation deficit is a big deal for a President--he has to be able to communicate with The People. It's vital.

But Mitt's a Big Government Republican. He and his big heart want to run your life, same as a BG Democrat, just thinks he could do it more competently than the other guys. And he probably could, but that's not the President's job. The President is the chief executive, not the national daddy.

There are many great choices now, brilliant, accomplished people.

(Mitt wasn't my choice, but he was all there was left after he stabbed & sabotaged all the others.)

Cheers, James Arthur

Pols should never campaign on taxes. You'll either make 'em mad or scare 'em.

+1 And he had this sweaty, shrill quality on camera. Which surprises me

- I'd think that Roger Ailes would have something to say about that :)

Yeah, good luck with that. The message has been National Daddy since the '30s. You can't sell small government at all any more to anybody who didn't ascribe to that in 1996.

There is just so much fear out there.

Most are abysmal politicians. You have to know how the message will play. You'll hook the True Believers with "defund Planned Parenthood" but most people won't hear it. Etc, etc. Frankly, that ship sailed in '03. This happens a lot - the more Libertarian branch of the Repubs get to going and the Neocons come along ans wreck it. And fiscally, it doesn't ultimately matter - the spending is just a proxy for power and you can't get anybody to give that up.

The whole thing is like a Petri dish for careerist do-nothings.

All I have to think of is my Mom - a teacher, a teacher to *poor kids*, rabid, dyed in the wool LBJ Democrat and one of the sharpest people who draws breath. If it won't work with her, it won't work.

Reagan, and even Dubya could both talk to anybody*. These are just preachin' to the choir ( with the possible exception of Rubio ).

*although Mom never cared for either - she thought Reagan was a fake cowboy and Dubya was frat boy. Well.. :P) We have fun about the subject anyway. She didn't know Reagan wrote, and I sent her one of the books and she liked it and was quite vocal about what she disagreed with.

He was a lump as a politician. He could say "I am breathing" and it sounded like he was lying. I hate to say that, but it's true.

Politics are like Mystery Date now. Oh joy.

--
Les Cargill

Disagree. We *have* to talk about *real* things.

On the contrary, it's the only hope, and people are very interested. Americans understand instinctively that local decisions are better made locally (distributed intelligence, rather than centralized).

And Europeans get it too, otherwise they'd have one capital in Brussels and be done with it.

We're turning into the Eastern Bloc, but without the cool cars.

That's part of the 'Daddy' thing. Daddy doesn't tell you the full story because you don't need to trouble your pretty head with it.

That's unAmerican. America was the idea that a free people could run their own lives, better, and govern themselves too. Better. The further we get from that, the further we get from freedom, opportunity, and prosperity.

But there's a huge move afoot to set things right--the ship's righting itself.

Cheers, James Arthur

Well, God bless you for that. :)

But I really do think the insurance model of government has a place. Hayek agreed.

It would help if corporate America got a lot less venal, and, frankly a lot more responsible. Less careerist.

They aren't. Not in any interesting way. I talk to people... it's not good.

Wait.

LOL. Nah. We're turning into Florida. It, too has a St. Petersburg but it's not what you'd think...

Right, But it's what's expected now - going on four generations. Five? Six?

The "move" I see can't get past filling cable news with abysmal fluff pieces on various fallacious nonsense.

This is not Wm. F. Buckley.

--
Les Cargill

Any system predicated on altruism fails.

The genius of our original design was that when power's divided, competing interests check each other, in the process of pursuing their self-interest. E.g., competition, which controls quality and price.

If she still believes in the Great Society concept fifty years hence, she's beyond hope. It's barely one notch above just nuking the poor.

Ah, there's your error--watching TV. That's a cesspool.

You may be in a commonsense desert. The people I encounter--of all beliefs and various locales--are tired of hopenchange. And, America's been voting in more and more of the alternative nationwide since 2010.

The alternative is not up to snuff, but it's getting better too, over time.

Cheers, James Arthur

On Tue, 22 Sep 2015 19:25:25 -0700 (PDT), snipped-for-privacy@yahoo.com Gave us:

Since you apparently do not you decidedly wouldn't know, idiot.

This is predicated on the purest self interest. It just means you can fail and not live completely destitute.

Strictly speaking "altruism" is self-abnegation but that's not the common usage, nor is it the practice.

It allows people to raise the risk profile a bit. It need not be paternalistic.

Competition is fine so far as it goes. It doesn't go very far these days. Most goods and services are incumbent provided - and quite well.

I'm sure you know as well as anyone what's happened to "quality". You do still find it.

Of course she does. That's what 85 year olds still believe. It's hardly "nuking the poor" anyway.

If there's a there there ( she's deeply apolitical ) it's something akin to Fabian Socialism.

Absolutely. Not all of it, though.

I just find that my cynicism on his election was unfounded, other than a couple of teeth-gritters internationally ( as you noted ).

To bizarre effect. It's worth reading about Jefferson's born-again belief in political parties.

We'll see.

--
Les Cargill