Linux-Advocacy Digest #816, Volume #30 Mon, 11 Dec 00 20:13:05 EST
Contents:
Re: OS and Product Alternative Names - Idiocy in action ("Rodrigo Iglesias")
Re: Caifornia power shortage... (Russ Lyttle)
Re: Linux is awful ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Caifornia power shortage... (Russ Lyttle)
Re: Caifornia power shortage... (Russ Lyttle)
Re: Nobody wants Linux because it destroys hard disks. (kiwiunixman)
Re: Caifornia power shortage... (Russ Lyttle)
Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever (Giuliano Colla)
Re: Nobody wants Linux because it destroys hard disks. (kiwiunixman)
Re: A Microsoft exodus! (Russ Lyttle)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Rodrigo Iglesias" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: OS and Product Alternative Names - Idiocy in action
Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2000 00:10:52 GMT
> IMHO Microsoft makes crap products. When one aspect is measured against
> competitors, you will ALWAYS find a competitor which behaves better. I
> will NEVER use Office again unless there is absolutely no other way.
I think that you can find crap products anywhere. I admit that Microsoft
perhaps sometimes puts before market than quality. But again, that is
something no company can avoid, as an example (and not a anti-Linux
one), Redhat.
> The Microsoft brand operating systems are probably the worst ones
> available. They have no qualities that make them better than other
> solutions available.
They do have qualities. Not seing them is being blind. Persons are
not at stupid as we use to imagine.
> The only reason people have to use Microsoft products is because
> Microsoft has a long history of coercing companies to sell only
> Microsoft products, and by doing this limited competition, and locking
> the application market by leveraging dominance of the PC OS business
> into application business.
What OS would you have used under the original IBM PC ? If it
is not MS-DOS, tell me some of the improvements of the product
you chose over the MS-DOS one. Just try to be objetive please.
> It is perfectly obvious, at least to me, the state of the art of
> computers would be much better off without Microsoft. The applications
> that "get the job done" as you say, would be a lot better if it were not
> for Microsoft. Admittedly, they would not have dancing paper clips, but
> they would be more stable and probably have fewer but better features.
Unproved all of that, just your opinion. I have had a ZX-81, a Spectrum,
an Amstrad CPC 6128, an Amiga 1200 and several PC's from 8086 to
Athlon, and I can't really tell me if I think Microsoft had a negative or a
positive influence in computers world. Even when admitting that their
current and past OS's are technically very bad ... may be if Microsoft
had not existed you would not have a computer ... is not Microsoft the
only guilty, there are IBM, Sun, ... why Amiga was left on the dust when
it was a better computer than PC ones (in my opinion) ? Why did IBM PC
triumph when it was a shit ? Why did not OS/2 succeeded ? (we are
talking about Windows 3.0 times ... easy to beat) Where was a GNU OS
running on the original Intel 8088 ? Things are not white or black.
------------------------------
From: Russ Lyttle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Caifornia power shortage...
Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2000 00:13:04 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
> >Russ Lyttle wrote:
> >>
> >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >> >
> >> > Mike Marion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> >> >
> >> > >"Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
> >> >
> >> > >> Actually, the REAL problem is that the ECO-NUTS in California shut
> >> > >> down practically every fission power project that came down the pike
> >> > >> in the 1970's.
> >> >
> >> > Blame the correct cause. Every project under design or planning being canceled
> >> > by the utilities after Three-Mile Island.
> >> >
> >> Not by the utilities, but by State and Federal regulators. The utilities
> >> would like to build more plants : they make more money. In the absence
> >> of more plants, they will just raise prices. That is a dead end for
> >> them, as older plants break down and become obsolete.
>
> >A couple years ago...at Ford Motor Company's River Rouge Complex, one of
> >those 1920's era plants had a "break down".
>
> >30 blue-collar workers killed.
>
> >That's liberalism for you.
>
> >They demonstrate their love for the common man by insisting that he work on
> >dangerous, obsolete equipment.
>
> This is a jackass statement. It is not the liberals who kept an old plant in
> service. It was Ford management. If you went off and studied the cause of
> that explosion, you would know this.
>
I suppose all the liberals quit using electricity so that the plant
could be shut down without requiring the load to be shifted somewhere
else? Just like the ones in California who are suing the Utilities for
shutting down plants for maintenance? Yes, a number of law suits have
been filed claiming, among other things, that the utility companies
didn't have to shut the plant down for scheduled maintenance. They could
have just rescheduled it for a time convenient for the plaintiff.
> BTW, any plant of any age, can have an explosion if its not properly
> maintained and safety rules are not followed.
>
> >>
> >> > >> If those plants had been built, a lot of oil-fired and coal-fired
> >> > >> plants would have been taken off-line a long time ago AND Cali.
> >> > >> would STILL have surplus capacity.
> >> >
> >> > >Not to mention the growth here. I mean, jesus, we don't have enough power
> >> > >for the people here, yet I've not heard a single official (or SDG&E reps)
> >> > >suggest that perhaps we should slow down the massive home building constantly
> >> > >going on here. What's going to happen in a year, or two when our population
> >> > >grows by that much more?
> >> >
> >> > >I shudder to think.
> >> >
> >> > >--
> >> > >Mike Marion-Unix SysAdmin/Senior Engineer-Qualcomm-http://www.miguelito.org
> --
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> -----------------------------------------------------------
--
Russ Lyttle, PE
<http://www.flash.net/~lyttlec>
Not Powered by ActiveX
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.x,comp.os.ms-windows,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux is awful
Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2000 19:13:00 -0500
Jerry Peters wrote:
>
> In comp.os.linux.x Ayende Rahien <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > "Jerry Peters" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:hIyW5.2834$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> In comp.os.linux.x Ayende Rahien <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>
> >> > "Jerry Peters" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >> > news:BieW5.5326$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> >> In comp.os.linux.x Ayende Rahien <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>
> >> >> >> Then let's discuss the registry, another stinking pile of dung from
> >> >> >> MS. The same information repeated multiple times under
> > indecipherable
> >> >> >> keys with little or no documentation. I'll take text format files
> > any
> >> >> >> day.
> >> >>
> >> >> > The registry is hard to deciphere.
> >> >> > You aren't suppose to work with it directly, not unless you've a good
> >> > level
> >> >> > of understanding about it.
> >> >>
> >> >> Oh yeah, little things like software that puts run some crud at
> >> >> startup in the registry that you want to get rid of.
> >>
> >> > msconfig.exe
> >>
> >> >> > As for it to be undocumented, this is *false*.
> >> >> > There are *plenty* of resources to find out what each key or node or
> >> > value
> >> >> > does.
> >> >> > Take a trip to *any* good NT/2K focused site, and you'll find plenty
> > of
> >> >> > tips on what the registry does, how it does it, and how to change it.
> >> >>
> >> >> But I shouldn't have to read anything or know anything to admin my
> >> >> computer, recognize the quote? At least the old *.ini files made some
> >> >> sense, the registry is just crap.
> >>
> >> > No, if you want to use the registry directly, you need to read.
> >> > If you use the tools that the OS/Application supply, you generaly don't
> > need
> >> > to use the registry directly.
> >>
> >> Ecxept that the OS and applications have a habit of doing things that
> >> I don't want, and the only way to fix them is to edit the registry.
> >> The typical windows mentality, BTW, "we know what's best for you".
> >>
> >> My major reason for editting the registry is to remove all of the junk
> >> that various apps add to startup. If they would only just add the damn
> >> things to the startup folder so I could remove them.
>
> > Why are you doing this via the registry?
> > msconfig.exe, the last tab.
> > You can disable/restore/delete programs that run from startup.
>
> Perhaps because I don't have a program called msconfig.exe?
>
The misconfig program?
> Jerry
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
H: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
I: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
direction that she doesn't like.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (C) above.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: Russ Lyttle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Caifornia power shortage...
Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2000 00:15:35 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >>
> >> Mike Marion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> >>
> >> >"Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
> >>
> >> >> Actually, the REAL problem is that the ECO-NUTS in California shut
> >> >> down practically every fission power project that came down the pike
> >> >> in the 1970's.
> >>
> >> Blame the correct cause. Every project under design or planning being canceled
> >> by the utilities after Three-Mile Island.
> >>
>
> >So...big fucking deal.
>
> >Three Mile Island was a text-book example of a nuclear power plant shutting
> >down EXACTLY AS DESIGNED.
>
> You're clueless here. It did not shutdown as designed, that's why there was a
> partial meltdown.
>
> >Anybody who interprets TMI as a failure in nuclear engineering
> >has their head deeeeeeeeeply inside their rectum.
>
> So according to you, all the utilities that cancelled plants didn't know what
> they were doing. You need to learn more before you shoot off. Remember the
> phrase "its the economy stupid." Well in this case, "It was economics
> stupid."
>
FYI, TMI safety worked as designed. The TMI incident released *less*
radiation into the atmosphere than a natural gas powered plant releases
*each day*.
> >> >> If those plants had been built, a lot of oil-fired and coal-fired
> >> >> plants would have been taken off-line a long time ago AND Cali.
> >> >> would STILL have surplus capacity.
> >>
> >> >Not to mention the growth here. I mean, jesus, we don't have enough power
> >> >for the people here, yet I've not heard a single official (or SDG&E reps)
> >> >suggest that perhaps we should slow down the massive home building constantly
> >> >going on here. What's going to happen in a year, or two when our population
> >> >grows by that much more?
> >>
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> -----------------------------------------------------------
--
Russ Lyttle, PE
<http://www.flash.net/~lyttlec>
Not Powered by ActiveX
------------------------------
From: Russ Lyttle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Caifornia power shortage...
Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2000 00:19:12 GMT
Woofbert wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Woofbert wrote:
> > >
> > > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Static66
> > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > > I read that they haven't built a power plant in over 15 years, yet in
> > > > that same time the population of california has basically
> > > > doubled...piss poor government planning..
> > >
> > > How DARE you question the wisdom of the past Republican administrations?
> >
> > Clue for the fucking clueless:...
>
> You can keep your personal attacks out of it.
>
> >although there are a lot of Communists
> > in California, they have not yet suceeded in attaining state-ownership
> > of the electric utilities.
>
> PUC, privately owned, has much higher rates than the publicly owned MUD
> in the Sacramento area. PUC is profit-driven, and so charges high rates
> for its customers so it can raise the value of its stocks. The MUD is
> service-driven, so it can serve its inherent owner-customers.
>
MUD is also subsidized by tax money and exempt from lots of regulations
and legal liabilities.
>>SNIP<<
> --
> Woofbert <woofbert at infernosoft dot com>, InfernoSoft Datadroid
> http://www.infernosoft.com/company/techsupport.html
> "Inside every Microsoft application, there are
> several simple programs trying to get out."
--
Russ Lyttle, PE
<http://www.flash.net/~lyttlec>
Not Powered by ActiveX
------------------------------
From: kiwiunixman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Nobody wants Linux because it destroys hard disks.
Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2000 00:24:16 GMT
Well, Microsoft includes features into their products (such as the
clippy in the MSOffice) that are useless as an ejection seat in a
helicopter.
kiwiunixman
<snype>
------------------------------
From: Russ Lyttle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Caifornia power shortage...
Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2000 00:25:12 GMT
The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
>
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Aaron R. Kulkis
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote
> on Sat, 09 Dec 2000 14:00:19 -0500
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >Russ Lyttle wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
> >>
> >> All this "unintuitive" behavior of power switches is causing a major
> >> problem in California. The issue of all these devices still drawing
> >> power is keeping a load on the system that it wasn't designed to handle.
> >> That coupled with lack of new power generation in California is putting
> >> a strain on the system now, promising a major breakdown in the near
> >> future. Relying to much on intuition and not enough on reason is going
> >> to get a lot of people killed.
> >
> >Actually, the REAL problem is that the ECO-NUTS in California shut
> >down practically every fission power project that came down the pike
> >in the 1970's.
> >
> >If those plants had been built, a lot of oil-fired and coal-fired
> >plants would have been taken off-line a long time ago AND Cali.
> >would STILL have surplus capacity.
>
> Indeed; there is radioactivity in coal. I forget how much coal
> would have to be burned to equal the radioactivity in a pound of solid
> nuclear waste, but one important issue is that the radioactivity
> in coal, if not scrubbed out, can be spewed into the air along with
> the usual sulphur dioxide (SO2 + H2O = H2SO4, sulphuric acid, not exactly
> something I'd want to breathe, thank you), carbon dioxide (harmless
> except for "global warming", which is a problem), and heat. (I'm not
> sure where the radioactivity comes from; if it's C-14, there's not much
> we can do about it.)
>
Most of the radiation in coal is mostly from Radon, and I think,
Thorium. The radon doesn't enter into chemical reactions and thus cannot
be scrubbed from the exhaust gas. There are other radioactive materials
in smaller amounts.
> Of course, if it is scrubbed out, someone's gotta change the filters
> occasionally. But one advantage of nuclear waste, AFAIK, is that
> it's solid. A highly radioactive and dangerous solid, to be sure
> (for many many millennia) but solid nevertheless; solids are a
> little easier to manage, especially if encased in glass and buried
> somewhere in salt with a "DO NOT TOUCH UNDER PENALTY OF RADIOACTIVE DEATH"
> sign on the door -- one hopes our progeny can read English.
>
> One also wonders about the helium in toy baloons; helium is an
> alpha particle with a couple of electrons. Now where did that
> helium come from? (It's not dangerous, of course -- but there's
> also radon gas. Presumably, the two are initially intermixed,
> although radon is a lot heavier.) [*]
>
> One big problem the nuclear program has is credibility -- and I'm not
> sure if that's because of Three Mile Island (Chernobyl didn't help
> either!), or what; the public is also apparently terrified of irradiated
> food, despite the increased safety thereof from a bacteriological point
> of view (quick, which is more dangerous, irradiated beef or beef
> contaminated by E. coli or salmonella?). This is arguably stupid, but
> it's going to take awhile to wash the metaphorical stain out. Certainly
> there are dangers -- but there are dangers to driving a car, too.
> We still do it.
>
> Oregon decomissioned the Trojan nuclear power plant (no jokes, please)
> some time ago; I know of no issues there, though I'd have to look.
> (Anybody know?)
>
> And, of course, the public appears enamored of Microsoft because it's
> "easy to use" and "intuitive" and "has the industry-standard GUI".
>
> Sigh.
>
> [.sigsnip]
>
> [*] Someone has made a case -- and it appears to be a pretty good one --
> that the Hindenberg exploded because of the flammability of its
> aluminium skin (and the poor static dissipation design thereof),
> not because of the hydrogen. One spark and it went up like a torch
> with an orange yellow flame -- hydrogen burns blue. A thought if we
> ever run out of helium...
>
> --
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- and I have to live in this crazy state
> up 80 days, 15:43, running Linux.
--
Russ Lyttle, PE
<http://www.flash.net/~lyttlec>
Not Powered by ActiveX
------------------------------
From: Giuliano Colla <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever
Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2000 00:27:10 GMT
Ayende Rahien wrote:
>
> "Steve Mading" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:913j3v$4re$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > In comp.os.linux.advocacy Ayende Rahien <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > : "Steve Mading" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > : news:913e0l$bng$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > :> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Ayende Rahien <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > :>
> > :> : We are talking about programs not following the rules to the platform
> > : they
> > :> : are being written for.
> > :> : Give me *one* good reason to ignore those rules?
> > :>
> > :> You two are talking about totally different problems. He's talking
> > :> about the rules being ambiguous, so you can't tell if you are following
> > :> them or not (what is "user stuff" and what isn't changes according to
> > :> personal opinion). You are talking about the case where the rules are
> > :> clear, but get ignored.
> >
> > : I already asked him to state some places where it isn't clear where it
> > : should go.
> > : He refused to answer.
> http://x61.deja.com/[ST_rn=ps]/getdoc.xp?AN=702461261&CONTEXT=976574077.1839
> 595588&hitnum=0
>
> > : Normally, it's clear answer.
> > : And defaulting to HKCU isn't bad either.
> >
> > That might be the case (I started reading this thread late into it), but
> > in any case it is still dishonest to attack him on a position he doesn't
> > actually hold. You're doing a strawman fallacy. If you don't agree with
> > the premise that the documentation is unclear, then attack his position
> > *there*. Don't make up this bullshit position to make it look like he
> > favors the act of ignoring the spec. Whether he's right or wrong about
> > the situation, THAT wasn't his stance.
>
> You really should read the thread (at least my & T. Max arguement, as this
> thread itself is *huge*) before saying this.
>
> http://www.deja.com/[ST_rn=ps]/dnquery.xp?ST=QS&svcclass=dnyr&defaultOp=%26&;
> DBS=&LNG=english&subjects=&authors=&fromdate=&todate=&showsort=score&maxhits
> =25&groups=&QRY=Windoze+2000+-+just+as+shitty+as+ever&x=49&y=9
> List 17,000 results.
>
> What documentation are you talking about which isn't clear?
> The registry structure is well documented, and the rule about putting
> machine spesific settings in HKLM and user spesifics settings in HKCU is
> five or six years old if not more.
> I made passing comment about bad programs putting user spesific setting in
> HKLM, and T. Max started raving how this was MS fault and how it was only
> this way because there is no competative alternative.
> I'm sure he would respond to this post saying something along those lines.
>
> <Qoute: T. Max replying to my post>
> >And if you do, you should get the other's user settings.
> >Because that it how it should work.
>
> Precisely; you should get the other user's settings. Which is why app
> developers put them in local.machine instead of local.user. You see how
> that works?
> </Qoute>
> <URL:
> http://x61.deja.com/[ST_rn=ps]/getdoc.xp?AN=700803337&CONTEXT=976574077.1839
> 595588&hitnum=5>
>
> After this, what a, I supposed to think?
>
> My initial point was that I couldn't understand why programmers put
> user-spesific data in HKLM, instead of HKCU.
> Putting user-spesific settings in HKCU doesn't limit the application in any
> way, and it provide the programmer with an easy way to make his/her program
> a true multi-user one without any hassle.
> T. Max jump on this and started using this as a proof that Windows is
> "crapware".
If you allow me to add my opinion to this long thread, I believe that
the basic problem is to determine what means "user specific".
If you can define it exactly, then you're right, but if you can't then
it's just an arbitrary constraint.
One must keep in mind that we're speaking of a general purpose desktop
computer, which purportedly should fill any conceivable need.
In most cases different "users" are set up just to differentiate
activities of the same user, while in other cases different users are
really different persons using the same computer (much less common
actually). But also in that case those different persons may perform the
same job (two secretaries working on different shifts), or very
different ones (students using the PC for their training, or for their
thesis).
As you can see from those cases, which are very far from describing all
possible variations, you have a number of settings which should be
common to all users, and some which should not, depending on the way the
system is used.
But in general, because of the prevailing usage of PC, settings which
are common to all users are more likely than those which aren't. As
Windows NT and Windows 2k are much less used that Windows 9x (maybe
you're not aware of it, but Linux is by far more used than Windows NT
and 2k), it's therefore quite understandable that developers privilege
the most diffused platform, and the most common usage of PC, ignoring
the arbitrary MS distinction between user-specific and machine-specific
settings.
------------------------------
From: kiwiunixman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Nobody wants Linux because it destroys hard disks.
Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2000 13:27:00 +1300
No, what he probably did was download the latest kernel, downloaded the
patch from the Iomega website, compile, and you're in business! not a
very hard task for person(s) who can read, and follow instructions, like me.
kiwiunixman
<snype>
------------------------------
From: Russ Lyttle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: A Microsoft exodus!
Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2000 00:28:47 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Russ Lyttle writes:
>
> >>>> Steve Mading writes:
>
> >>>>>>>> Not exactly uncommon. When my VCR is "off", it's still on by
> >>>>>>>> enough to keep a clock running and monitor its programming to
> >>>>>>>> determine whether to turn "on" (or should I say "more on") and
> >>>>>>>> record a program. Doesn't make the power switch any less
> >>>>>>>> intuitive.
>
> >>>>>>> Actually, I would say that that sort of power switch is highly
> >>>>>>> unintuitive. Intuitively, you'd expect that turning something
> >>>>>>> off would, you know, actually turn it off.
>
> >>>>>> Depends on what you consider "off" to be. When you turn your
> >>>>>> microwave oven off, do you expect it to lose the time? (Yes,
> >>>>>> that does presuppose an oven with a clock on the display.
> >>>>>> Are there any new models that don't have one of those built in?)
>
> >>>>> I haven't seen any microwaves with an on/off button lately.
>
> >>>> Okay then, "Start/Stop", if you must be pedantic.
>
> >>>>> If they had them, then yeah, I'd expect them to at least turn
> >>>>> the display off, and go down to a trickle that only serves
> >>>>> to maintain a few K of RAM (for the clock and maybe some programs)
> >>>>> (which takes very little power, as evidenced by calculators and
> >>>>> watches, and could be done by battery like it is for CMOS
> >>>>> settings on computers.)
>
> >>>> Even with the display on, it could still be a trickle.
>
> >>> All this "unintuitive" behavior of power switches is causing a major
> >>> problem in California.
>
> >> Illogical. It is quite possible that people will generally know what
> >> to do with a power switch without needing to consult a manual, but will
> >> not generally know how much power is consumed in the on and off states.
> >> Consider the AC adaptor for a modem, for example. The power switch is
> >> on the modem, not the AC adaptor.
>
> > Logical. The behavior of the power switch changed from its traditional
> > role. People *think* it still works the way it did 10 years ago.
>
> Oh really? Your Curtis Mathes is older than that. You claim it kept
> the power on.
>
Yes, but it was very unusual for its time.
> > Its behavior isn't capable of being comprehended without logical thought.
>
> And with logical thought, the average consumer will know how much power
> is still being consumed by a unit even when the switch is in the off
> position? That's not the issue here.
>
> > (See definition of intuitive).
>
> Practice what you preach.
>
> > They are still trying to make decisions
> > based on the traditional use of the power switch - power cord setup.
>
> On the contrary, sounds like your example involves a mislabeled
> button. There is a difference between "video blank" and "power off".
> You've described the former. I've been talking about the latter.
>
No, they concern the device that serves as a power switch these days.
> >>> The issue of all these devices still drawing power is keeping a
> >>> load on the system that it wasn't designed to handle.
>
> >> Are you suggesting that systems outside of California were somehow
> >> designed to handle it?
>
> > No. Outside CA, NY, and MA, there have been more plants built. These
> > plants are now selling some of their excess off peak power to CA. In the
> > past CA would sell power to Texas during the peak time in Texas and
> > Texas would sell to CA during the peak time there. Now the transfer is
> > all one way. To CA. But it is getting difficult for Texas utilities to
> > justify building more plants just to have power to sell to CA. They have
> > to justify the need for plants based on need in Texas.
>
> That has nothing to do with being designed to handle the load.
>
> >>> That coupled with lack of new power generation in California is putting
> >>> a strain on the system now, promising a major breakdown in the near
> >>> future.
>
> >> Sounds like those Californians are going to have to do without their
> >> 72-inch projection televisions. (Did your Curtis Mathes need 10 amps
> >> to keep its filament going?)
>
> Note: no response.
>
> >>> Relying to much on intuition and not enough on reason is going
> >>> to get a lot of people killed.
>
> >> The power consumed by a device in the off state has absolutely
> >> nothing to do with the issue of whether the power switch itself
> >> is intuitive.
>
> Note: no response.
OK, what is your intuitive concept of the operation of a power switch?
--
Russ Lyttle, PE
<http://www.flash.net/~lyttlec>
Not Powered by ActiveX
------------------------------
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
The service address, to which questions about the list itself and requests
to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, is:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can send mail to the entire list by posting to comp.os.linux.advocacy.
Linux may be obtained via one of these FTP sites:
ftp.funet.fi pub/Linux
tsx-11.mit.edu pub/linux
sunsite.unc.edu pub/Linux
End of Linux-Advocacy Digest
******************************
