Re: [CGUYS] Slow Dell startup
Fred Holmes wrote: drives could withstand a bit of vibration. Now I know better. Live and learn. Fred Holmes If getting to the HDD is any easier, you could look into getting some silicon washers and longer bolts and add a bit if vibration isolation to the drive. John S. -- Sous le ciel tout étoilé John Settle Personal Webpage: Urban Astro Images http://home.comcast.net/%7Ejjs-cts/ * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
[CGUYS] HDDs and vibrators was: Slow Dell startup
I haven't been following this thread, but after seeing this post this morning I had to go back and look. And I just have to ask: How the heck did you guys get off in some apparently completely different direction here? Certainly neither of you is suggesting his slow boot has to do with his drive being vibrated by a fan And what's this about live and learn? What exactly are we suppose to learn - that fans can cause so much vibration in a computer that the bearings in your hard drive will be affected? The word poppycock comes to mind. Look, I'm not from Missouri, but in this case I really don't think propagating this type of myth is going to assist the list discussion at all. :) But maybe I shouldn't have said anything, and instead waited for one of you to suggest he get a SSD drive! Or are those affected by vibrators also? drives could withstand a bit of vibration. Now I know better. Live and learn. If getting to the HDD is any easier, you could look into getting some silicon washers and longer bolts and add a bit if vibration isolation to the drive. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] HDDs and vibrators was: Slow Dell startup
We should be clear, they were talking about HD's being affected by vibration...NOT vibrators. Unless you are visiting the adult boutique and putting some purple monsters inside your computer case? On Sat, Aug 22, 2009 at 7:35 AM, Tony B ton...@gmail.com wrote: But maybe I shouldn't have said anything, and instead waited for one of you to suggest he get a SSD drive! Or are those affected by vibrators also? * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] HDDs and vibrators was: Slow Dell startup
Certainly neither of you is suggesting his slow boot has to do with his drive being vibrated by a fan No, they're two different issues. I have the slow-booting PC. Someone else has a system where the HDD seems to be affected by vibration from the fan. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
[CGUYS] WSJ.com | Why ATT Killed Google Voice
OPINION AUGUST 19, 2009 Why ATT Killed Google Voice By ANDY KESSLER Earlier this month, Apple rejected an application for the iPhone called Google Voice. The uproar set off a chain of events—Google's CEO Eric Schmidt resigning from Apple's board, and the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) investigating wireless open access and handset exclusivity—that may finally end the 135-year-old Alexander Graham Bell era. It's about time. With Google Voice, you have one Google phone number that callers use to reach you, and you pick up whichever phone—office, home or cellular—rings. You can screen calls, listen in before answering, record calls, read transcripts of your voicemails, and do free conference calls. Domestic calls and texting are free, and international calls to Europe are two cents a minute. In other words, a unified voice system, something a real phone company should have offered years ago. Apple has an exclusive deal with ATT in the U.S., stirring up rumors that ATT was the one behind Apple rejecting Google Voice. How could ATT not object? ATT clings to the old business of charging for voice calls in minutes. It takes not much more than 10 kilobits per second of data to handle voice. In a world of megabit per-second connections, that's nothing—hence Google's proposal to offer voice calls for no cost and heap on features galore. What this episode really uncovers is that ATT is dying. ATT is dragging down the rest of us by overcharging us for voice calls and stifling innovation in a mobile data market critical to the U.S. economy. For the latest quarter, ATT reported local voice revenue down 12%, long distance down 15%. With customers unplugging home phones and using flat-rate Internet services for long-distance calls (again, voice is just data), ATT's wireline operating income is down 36%. Even in the wireless segment, which grew 10% overall, per-customer voice revenue is down 7%. Wireless data service is ATT's only bright spot, up a whopping 26% per customer. How so? As any parent of teenagers knows, text messages are 20 cents each, or $5,000 per megabyte. After the first month and a $320 bill, we all pony up $10 a month for unlimited texting plans. Same for Internet access. With my iPhone, I pay $30 a month for unlimited data service (actually, one gigabyte per month). Is it worth that? The à la carte price for other not-so-smart phones is $5 per megabyte (one-thousandth of a gigabyte) per month. So we buy monthly plans. Margins in ATT's Wireless segment are an embarrassingly high 25%. The trick in any communications and media business is to own a pipe between you and your customers so you can charge what you like. Cellphone companies don't have wired pipes, but by owning spectrum they do have a pipe and pricing power. Aren't there phone competitors to knock down the price? Hardly. Verizon Wireless, T-Mobile and others all joined ATT in bidding huge amounts for wireless spectrum in FCC auctions, some $70-plus billion since the mid-1990s. That all gets passed along to you and me in the form of higher fees and friendly oligopolies that don't much compete on price. Google Voice is the new competition. By the way, Apple also has a pipe—call it a virtual pipe—to customers. Its iTunes music service (now up to one-quarter of all music sales, according to NPD Market Research) works exclusively with iPods and iPhones. The new Palm Pre, another exclusive deal, this time by Verizon Wireless, tricked iTunes into thinking it was an iPod. Apple quickly changed its software to lock the Pre out, and one would expect Apple locking out any Google phone from using iTunes. It wouldn't be so bad if we were just overpaying for our mobile plans. Americans are used to that—see mail, milk and medicine. But it's inexcusable that new, feature-rich and productive applications like Google Voice are being held back, just to prop up ATT while we wait for it to transition away from its legacy of voice communications. How many productive apps beyond Google Voice are waiting in the wings? So now the FCC and its new Chairman Julius Genachowski are getting involved. Usually this means a set of convoluted rules to make up for past errors in allocating scarce resources that—in the name of fairness—end up creating a new mess. Some might say it is time to rethink our national communications policy. But even that's obsolete. I'd start with a simple idea. There is no such thing as voice or text or music or TV shows or video. They are all just data. We need a national data policy, and here are four suggestions: • End phone exclusivity. Any device should work on any network. Data flows freely. • Transition away from owning airwaves. As we've seen with license-free bandwidth via Wi-Fi networking, we can share the airwaves without interfering with each other. Let new carriers emerge based on quality of service rather than spectrum owned. Cellphone coverage from huge
Re: [CGUYS] HDDs and vibrators was: Slow Dell startup
At 10:35 AM 8/22/2009, Tony B wrote: Certainly neither of you is suggesting his slow boot has to do with his drive being vibrated by a fan Not directly, but fan vibration could cause an imperfect write leading to later slow reads. If the reads are part of the boot process, then the boot process would be slowed. In my case, a particular application was very slow to load. (not a boot process load) Spinrite cleaned up the disk and cured the slow load. I'm speculating that the slow read of the executable file was due to a bad write in the past, caused by fan vibration. Fan is in the docking station enclosure of the hard drive. Mobile Rack Fred Holmes * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] WSJ.com | Why ATT Killed Google Voice
I usually avoid these endless pissing contests that seem to occupy so much Computer Guys bandwidth. But I have two comments to Mr. Kessler's piece: 1. I don't trust anyone who used to be a hedge fund manager to give an honest opinion of anything and 2. while I am against huge profits from either sanctioned or quasi monopolies, *somebody* has to pay for the infrastructure (both building it and maintaining it). If the users of the services don't pay for it, then who will? Mike b_s-wilk wrote: OPINION AUGUST 19, 2009 Why ATT Killed Google Voice By ANDY KESSLER Earlier this month, Apple rejected an application for the iPhone called Google Voice. The uproar set off a chain of events—Google's CEO Eric Schmidt resigning from Apple's board, and the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) investigating wireless open access and handset exclusivity—that may finally end the 135-year-old Alexander Graham Bell era. It's about time. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] WSJ.com | Why ATT Killed Google Voice
It is truly strange to see the WSJ arguing the benefits of a free market. This is, of course, another manifestation of the network neutrality debate. It is bad for society to allow the carriers to impose bizarre restrictions on what devices can generate data packets on their networks and what those data packets can contain. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] WSJ.com | Why ATT Killed Google Voice
And also bad to charge different prices depending on what that byte carries. It is ridiculous that texting costs so much even when you have the unlimited data plan. Sent from my iPod On Aug 22, 2009, at 11:02 AM, TPiwowar t...@tjpa.com wrote: It is truly strange to see the WSJ arguing the benefits of a free market. This is, of course, another manifestation of the network neutrality debate. It is bad for society to allow the carriers to impose bizarre restrictions on what devices can generate data packets on their networks and what those data packets can contain. *** ** ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http:// www.cguys.org/ ** *** ** * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] HDDs and vibrators was: Slow Dell startup
Then it's just another case of people neglecting to change the subject line. No, you will have a hard time convincing me a fan of any type could vibrate enough to cause an r/w error on a drive. But be aware - cosmic rays *can* cause errors. Not as many as 'normal' causes, but surely it happens. Anyway, that's what chkdsk is for. If my systems crash suddenly for any reason, I run a full chkdsk on all the drives afterwards. On Sat, Aug 22, 2009 at 12:13 PM, Fred Holmes f...@his.com wrote: At 10:35 AM 8/22/2009, Tony B wrote: Certainly neither of you is suggesting his slow boot has to do with his drive being vibrated by a fan Not directly, but fan vibration could cause an imperfect write leading to later slow reads. If the reads are part of the boot process, then the boot process would be slowed. In my case, a particular application was very slow to load. (not a boot process load) Spinrite cleaned up the disk and cured the slow load. I'm speculating that the slow read of the executable file was due to a bad write in the past, caused by fan vibration. Fan is in the docking station enclosure of the hard drive. Mobile Rack * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] WSJ.com | Why ATT Killed Google Voice
Most people would probably just say Who cares? Only elitist bastards would pay over $100/mo for a telephone anyway.. I'm not sure I agree with them, as there may actually be some people that make over $3.33 worth of telephone calls a day. What about brain surgeons? Just because they functioned perfectly well with beepers doesn't mean lives aren't being saved constantly by these new services. I know my wife, at about $50/mo, doesn't make anywhere near $1.66 worth of calls in a day. All of it could wait until she gets home/to work. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] HDDs and vibrators was: Slow Dell startup
On Aug 22, 2009, at 2:12 PM, Tony B wrote: No, you will have a hard time convincing me a fan of any type could vibrate enough to cause an r/w error on a drive. But be aware - cosmic rays *can* cause errors. Not as many as 'normal' causes, but surely it happens. Anyway, that's what chkdsk is for. If my systems crash suddenly for any reason, I run a full chkdsk on all the drives afterwards. Worrying that fan vibration might damage the data on the drive is definitely obsessive compulsive behavior. If the vibration were that severe you would not be wanting to be in the same room with this computer. A quick solution to fan noise is to unplug the fan or stick a fork in its blades. Of course, an obsessive compulsive person would then go bonkers because the fan was not running. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] WSJ.com | Why ATT Killed Google Voice
I have several friends who subscribe to the sprint 99 all in one plan. They do this because they keep no land line and no other connection to the internet. So figure in what you spend for land lines and your DSL/cable internet and you might just be above 100 bux. On Sat, Aug 22, 2009 at 11:21 AM, Tony B ton...@gmail.com wrote: Most people would probably just say Who cares? Only elitist bastards would pay over $100/mo for a telephone anyway.. I'm not sure I agree with them, as there may actually be some people that make over $3.33 worth of telephone calls a day. What about brain surgeons? Just because they functioned perfectly well with beepers doesn't mean lives aren't being saved constantly by these new services. I know my wife, at about $50/mo, doesn't make anywhere near $1.66 worth of calls in a day. All of it could wait until she gets home/to work. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** * * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
[CGUYS] WSJ.com | Why ATT Killed Google Voice
OPINION AUGUST 19, 2009 Why ATT Killed Google Voice By ANDY KESSLER Earlier this month, Apple rejected an application for the iPhone called Google Voice. The uproar set off a chain of events—Google's CEO Eric Schmidt resigning from Apple's board, and the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) investigating wireless open access and handset exclusivity—that may finally end the 135-year-old Alexander Graham Bell era. It's about time. With Google Voice, you have one Google phone number that callers use to reach you, and you pick up whichever phone—office, home or cellular—rings. You can screen calls, listen in before answering, record calls, read transcripts of your voicemails, and do free conference calls. Domestic calls and texting are free, and international calls to Europe are two cents a minute. In other words, a unified voice system, something a real phone company should have offered years ago. Apple has an exclusive deal with ATT in the U.S., stirring up rumors that ATT was the one behind Apple rejecting Google Voice. How could ATT not object? ATT clings to the old business of charging for voice calls in minutes. It takes not much more than 10 kilobits per second of data to handle voice. In a world of megabit per-second connections, that's nothing—hence Google's proposal to offer voice calls for no cost and heap on features galore. What this episode really uncovers is that ATT is dying. ATT is dragging down the rest of us by overcharging us for voice calls and stifling innovation in a mobile data market critical to the U.S. economy. For the latest quarter, ATT reported local voice revenue down 12%, long distance down 15%. With customers unplugging home phones and using flat-rate Internet services for long-distance calls (again, voice is just data), ATT's wireline operating income is down 36%. Even in the wireless segment, which grew 10% overall, per-customer voice revenue is down 7%. Wireless data service is ATT's only bright spot, up a whopping 26% per customer. How so? As any parent of teenagers knows, text messages are 20 cents each, or $5,000 per megabyte. After the first month and a $320 bill, we all pony up $10 a month for unlimited texting plans. Same for Internet access. With my iPhone, I pay $30 a month for unlimited data service (actually, one gigabyte per month). Is it worth that? The à la carte price for other not-so-smart phones is $5 per megabyte (one-thousandth of a gigabyte) per month. So we buy monthly plans. Margins in ATT's Wireless segment are an embarrassingly high 25%. The trick in any communications and media business is to own a pipe between you and your customers so you can charge what you like. Cellphone companies don't have wired pipes, but by owning spectrum they do have a pipe and pricing power... snip http://online.wsj.com/article/SB20001424052970204683204574358552882901262.html —Mr. Kessler, a former hedge-fund manager, is the author of How We Got Here (Collins, 2005). Printed in The Wall Street Journal, page A15 Copyright 2009 Dow Jones Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] WSJ.com | Why ATT Killed Google Voice
Apple's response to the DOJ inquiry looks a lot more plausible than the explanations proffered by the conspiracy theorists. In a nutshell, adding Google Voice to an iPhone significantly changes the operation of the iPhone. It replaces so many of the iPhone's functions that it left Apple wondering if the result was still an iPhone. Apple claims that it did not reject Google Voice, but that it merely delayed its approval and kicked the decision upstairs to a senior management committee. They need some time to sort it out. In a sense this is like the situation when right-wing wackos edit a film to meet their higher standards and then try to redistribute the film. The courts have ruled this illegal. The creator if the work has the right to control what is in the work. If the creator wants to issue a censored version it is their right to do so, but a third party may not do it. Here Apple has to decide what is essential about their iPhone and to what degree they will allow third parties to change the essential nature of their creation. There are good arguments to be made on either side of this issue. I can understand Apple being unable to make a snap judgement on this one. If the extensive changes made to the iPhone by Google Voice break some of the functionality of the iPhone will customers blame Apple or Google? Who has to make repairs? http://www.apple.com/hotnews/apple-answers-fcc-questions/ The best of all worlds might be to have Apple and Google work together to make this work. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] WSJ.com | Why ATT Killed Google Voice
Everything is the fault of those damn neomircrosofticons eh? How you manage to bring your made up boogey men into everything is amazing. That said the fact you back Apple is shocking...shocking! Changes the iphone so it's not an iphone...uh...yeaaah. So the FCC is investigating Apple *not* rejecting the app because it was kicked higher up...but the app that wasn't rejected and is being investigating for being rejected, *if* perhaps Apple had rejected it...but did not...it would be because their iphone would suddenly be some other thing not an iphone. But they didn't reject it so the FCC investigation is just a big waste of time anyway? That right? You are brilliant! On Sat, Aug 22, 2009 at 1:17 PM, TPiwowar t...@tjpa.com wrote: Apple's response to the DOJ inquiry looks a lot more plausible than the explanations proffered by the conspiracy theorists. In a nutshell, adding Google Voice to an iPhone significantly changes the operation of the iPhone. It replaces so many of the iPhone's functions that it left Apple wondering if the result was still an iPhone. Apple claims that it did not reject Google Voice, but that it merely delayed its approval and kicked the decision upstairs to a senior management committee. They need some time to sort it out. In a sense this is like the situation when right-wing wackos edit a film to meet their higher standards and then try to redistribute the film. The courts have ruled this illegal. The creator if the work has the right to control what is in the work. If the creator wants to issue a censored version it is their right to do so, but a third party may not do it. Here Apple has to decide what is essential about their iPhone and to what degree they will allow third parties to change the essential nature of their creation. There are good arguments to be made on either side of this issue. I can understand Apple being unable to make a snap judgement on this one. If the extensive changes made to the iPhone by Google Voice break some of the functionality of the iPhone will customers blame Apple or Google? Who has to make repairs? http://www.apple.com/hotnews/apple-answers-fcc-questions/ The best of all worlds might be to have Apple and Google work together to make this work. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** * * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] WSJ.com | Why ATT Killed Google Voice
Apple's response to the DOJ inquiry looks a lot more plausible than the explanations proffered by the conspiracy theorists. In a nutshell, adding Google Voice to an iPhone significantly changes the operation of the iPhone. It replaces so many of the iPhone's functions that it left Apple wondering if the result was still an iPhone. Apple claims that it did not reject Google Voice, but that it merely delayed its approval and kicked the decision upstairs to a senior management committee. They need some time to sort it out. You first feign outrage over Google Voice and then almost immediately fold like a cheap chair and spew a they're just so misunderstood defense of Apple. Usually at this point in the script there's a lively song and dance number to bring the audience back. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
[CGUYS] [Fwd: PCMag Analysis: Apple, ATT and Google Voice]
*Analysis: Apple, ATT and Google Voice* 08.21.09 by Sascha Segan PCMag.com Apple on Friday posted its response to the Federal Communications Commission's Google Voice iPhone app inquiry on their Web site, and the company finally made it clear what they have against Google Voice-type apps: Apple doesn't want anyone messing with their stuff. Their argument sounds oddly plaintive: Apple spent a lot of time and effort developing their phone interface, so they don't like that Google replac[es] the iPhone's core mobile telephone functionality and Apple user interface with its own user interface for telephone calls, text messaging and voicemail. A tiny violin plays for Apple. But the line is clear: Apple sees their platform as their house. Software developers are guests, and they can't rearrange the furniture. The iPhone is not a completely open platform - but only fools ever believed it was... http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2351900,00.asp * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] WSJ.com | Why ATT Killed Google Voice
Apple's response to the DOJ inquiry looks a lot more plausible than the explanations proffered by the conspiracy theorists. In a nutshell, adding Google Voice to an iPhone significantly changes the operation of the iPhone. It replaces so many of the iPhone's functions that it left Apple wondering if the result was still an iPhone. Apple claims that it did not reject Google Voice, but that it merely delayed its approval and kicked the decision upstairs to a senior management committee. They need some time to sort it out. Sorry about the double post. Listserve sent a rejection notice for WSJ story that's posted, and rejected the PC Mag story instead, but didn't mention it [--sending now]. I posted two different articles about the same issue. I give very little credence to anything on the editorial page of the WSJ, but it's certainly provocative--and narrow-minded. Consider the header, using Kill instead of a more accurate description. ATT isn't dying, it's SBC, an incestuous relationship that is doing just fine. None of this would be an issue if the telcos would embrace new technology, and price it fairly. No, they prefer to continue to double-charge for cellular calls and cry foul when they get slapped by Google and Skype--and FCC. It makes sense for Apple to reject the GV technology that could possibly cause major changes in the iPhone's functionality, however, Google Voice is the perfect kind of app for the iPod Touch. When a technology affects an Apple product so significantly, it's good business to wait, do serious RD to determine as many effects as possible before making GV available. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] WSJ.com | Why ATT Killed Google Voice
I posted two different articles about the same issue. I give very little credence to anything on the editorial page of the WSJ, but it's certainly provocative--and narrow-minded. Consider the header, using Kill instead of a more accurate description. ATT isn't dying, it's SBC, an incestuous relationship that is doing just fine. None of this would be an issue if the telcos would embrace new technology, and price it fairly. No, they prefer to continue to double-charge for cellular calls and cry foul when they get slapped by Google and Skype--and FCC. So get a T-Mobile myTouch, which runs Android, and get all the Google Voice you want. No ideological contortions needed. T-Mobile's A-Y-C-E 3G plan is $25 for web and $35 for web and messaging. You get a great phone with GV on it without waiting and ATT+Apple get the message loud and clear. Click here for the instructions: http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/08/09/how-i-learned-to-quit-the-iphone-and-love-google-voice/ * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] WSJ.com | Why ATT Killed Google Voice
Apple's response to the DOJ inquiry looks a lot more plausible than the explanations proffered by the conspiracy theorists. In a nutshell, adding Google Voice to an iPhone significantly changes the operation of the iPhone. It replaces so many of the iPhone's functions that it left Apple wondering if the result was still an iPhone. Apple claims that it did not reject Google Voice, but that it merely delayed its approval and kicked the decision upstairs to a senior management committee. They need some time to sort it out. Time for a reality check: http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/08/21/the-simple-truth-whats-really-going-on- with-apple-google-att-and-the-fcc/ Our sources at Google tell us in no uncertain terms that Apple rejected the application. And we have an independent third party app developer who tells us that an Apple Exec also told them back in July that the Google Voice Application was rejected. In other words, there is strong evidence that Apple is, well, lying. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
[CGUYS] iMac problem
My 2 year old intel iMac won't boot. I got a grey kernel crash screen yesterday, but it restarted and ran fine in the evening so I didn't take any time to investigate. This evening it started strangely, displayed properly, but would not run Eye TV. I tried to restart it and now all it does is play the audio crescendo, sounds like it reads the hard drive for a moment and then does nothing else. No display. I put the OS DVD in and started, holding C, and it makes noises like it's reading the DVD but gives up in a few moments. I tried resetting the NVRAM, but it won't reset it. No beeps. Any ideas? Thanks Much. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] WSJ.com | Why ATT Killed Google Voice
So if you are using Google voice across the data plan as you describe does that essentially free you from the expensive daytime minutes restriction? Can you get a cell phone with a data plan AND WITHOUT a talk plan? db Jeff Wright wrote: I posted two different articles about the same issue. I give very little credence to anything on the editorial page of the WSJ, but it's certainly provocative--and narrow-minded. Consider the header, using Kill instead of a more accurate description. ATT isn't dying, it's SBC, an incestuous relationship that is doing just fine. None of this would be an issue if the telcos would embrace new technology, and price it fairly. No, they prefer to continue to double-charge for cellular calls and cry foul when they get slapped by Google and Skype--and FCC. So get a T-Mobile myTouch, which runs Android, and get all the Google Voice you want. No ideological contortions needed. T-Mobile's A-Y-C-E 3G plan is $25 for web and $35 for web and messaging. You get a great phone with GV on it without waiting and ATT+Apple get the message loud and clear. Click here for the instructions: http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/08/09/how-i-learned-to-quit-the-iphone-and-love-google-voice/ * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** * * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
[CGUYS] Mysterious iChat / AIM messages transcripts appearing on iMac desktop ?
An uncle of mine who lives by himself and just bought his first computer... a new Leopard iMac... reported that there were mysterious windows showing on his desktop when he would wake the computer up to check his email (He doesn't turn it off...). I live on the opposite side of the country so I logged on via LogMeIn and found that there currently were three iChat / AIM transcripts ... not really transcripts of two way conversation but 3 different strangers saying hello basically. Under iChat preferences besides a Bonjour acct., there also was a login.oscar.aol.com account operating on port 5190. I deleted the account but am very curious how it could have gotten there... I've heard of hackers surreptitiously using iChat, microphone and camera to spy on people etc and was wondering if this was what was going on ... or worse... ? Currently he has no use whatsoever for iChat (he's just learning to mouse about, read emails etc... he hasn't even sent an email yet...) and I'd like to make sure his computer and iChat are secure and impervious to more of the same. Can anyone tell me what probably occurred and what are the best procedures for securing iChat/ AIM that won't also block the LogMeIn remote login that I use to give him lessons? db * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] WSJ.com | Why ATT Killed Google Voice
So if you are using Google voice across the data plan as you describe does that essentially free you from the expensive daytime minutes restriction? I don't know the specific details. You'd have to contact TM. Can you get a cell phone with a data plan AND WITHOUT a talk plan? Soon, you won't be able to *not* get a data plan on ATT with a smartphone. http://gizmodo.com/5342749/att-forcing-data-plans-with-all-smartphones-starting-sept-6 * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] WSJ.com | Why ATT Killed Google Voice
It is about profits. Trust me, the only thing that matters is rhe money. Oh, no question. I wasn't suggesting otherwise. If a product is good it will stand on its own. Agreed. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] WSJ.com | Why ATT Killed Google Voice
Verizon has also gone this route and therefore I am on my last smartphone. Stewart At 12:20 AM 8/23/2009, you wrote: So if you are using Google voice across the data plan as you describe does that essentially free you from the expensive daytime minutes restriction? I don't know the specific details. You'd have to contact TM. Can you get a cell phone with a data plan AND WITHOUT a talk plan? Soon, you won't be able to *not* get a data plan on ATT with a smartphone. http://gizmodo.com/5342749/att-forcing-data-plans-with-all-smartphones-starting-sept-6 * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** * Rev. Stewart A. Marshall mailto:popoz...@earthlink.net Prince of Peace www.princeofpeaceozark.org Ozark, AL SL 82 * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
