EmbeddedRelated.com
Forums
Memfault State of IoT Report

looking for hardware source

Started by Unknown January 4, 2008
On Mon, 07 Jan 2008 14:46:44 -0600, I said, "Pick a card, any card"
and David Kelly <n4hhe@Yahoo.com> instead replied:

>Failure to reply in the proper format will cause many to ignore one's >reply. If you want a reply then you will reply in the format expected by >those who are capable of answering.
This is just plain silly. In the early days of USENET, before it was even called that, the norm was top posting to reply leaving the balance of the message for reference only. Period. Some folk in the business world still do that. Go to any help desk for any software issue and that's how they do it. The even ask you to reply on top leaving the balance of the message dialog as a record of the discussion thus far. So, if you want to top post, that's your proper format. If you like to middle post, that's your proper format. If you like to bottom post, that's yours. This is a place where YOUR choices are solitary. You don't get to drive everyone else's choices to match yours. You always have the choice to opt out of subscribing to such a vile place where top posting happens even when you forbid it. -- Ray
David Kelly wrote:

> Anonymous. wrote: > >> The case for top-posting is won when those against resort >> to infantile ad hominem remarks. >> >> Top, bottom and middle postings are just minor variations >> on style, up to the individual. The content of messages is that >> which is important. >
<snip>
> Is hard for some to understand how one might not be happy to be proven > correct. "Anonymous." provided an excellent example of poor > communication (infantile too). At least he/she trimmed a bit. Real Top > Posters Never Trim.
Wow, here we go again on this merry-go-round; I haven't read the bulk of this thread, only the first few (on-topic) posts, however, despite conventions, in a long thread, I _prefer_ to read top-posted, trimmed replies, since I have been following the thread, and find it very annoying to need to scroll to the bottom of a lot of dross to get to the (often one line) reply. I would hope that most replies will be interspersed with quoted material rather than residing at one extreme of the post or the other. Perhaps a new convention could be established that classifies a thread into a top or bottom posted variety in the subject line, to forewarn anyone opposed to either format ;-) Banning html from text-only newsgroups is a _great_ idea however. Regards, Michael
On Mon, 07 Jan 2008 14:46:44 -0600, I said, "Pick a card, any card"
and David Kelly <n4hhe@Yahoo.com> instead replied:

Sure they do.

>Is hard for some to understand how one might not be happy to be proven >correct. "Anonymous." provided an excellent example of poor >communication (infantile too). At least he/she trimmed a bit. Real Top >Posters Never Trim.
-- Ray
On 5 Jan., 15:05, Brian Gaughan <""bgaughan \"@ woh dot rr dot com">
wrote:
> mail.encod...@googlemail.com wrote: > > Hi, > > > I'm coming from the software part of computing and have > > very limited experience with the hardware part. When I tried > > to find the hardware for an embedded system (see below) the > > cheapest I could find was in the US$ 520 area. > > > Is this the usual range for the described hardware or have I looked > > at the wrong web sites?
[snip]
> Have you investigated Soekris hardware? They specialize in hardware very much like your requirements. > > http://www.soekris.com
Thanks for you suggestion. They are not perfect but far better than the previous candidates. Thomas
Ray Haddad wrote:
> David Kelly <n4hhe@Yahoo.com> replied: > >> Failure to reply in the proper format will cause many to ignore >> one's reply. If you want a reply then you will reply in the >> format expected by those who are capable of answering. > > This is just plain silly. In the early days of USENET, before it > was even called that, the norm was top posting to reply leaving > the balance of the message for reference only. Period.
Ridiculous misinformation. Read the rfcs. Read the following: <http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html> <http://www.caliburn.nl/topposting.html> <http://www.netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html> -- Chuck F (cbfalconer at maineline dot net) <http://cbfalconer.home.att.net> Try the download section. -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
msg wrote:
>
... snip ...
> > Banning html from text-only newsgroups is a _great_ idea however.
It already is banned. The better newsreaders can be told not to display it. -- Chuck F (cbfalconer at maineline dot net) <http://cbfalconer.home.att.net> Try the download section. -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
On Mon, 07 Jan 2008 18:13:21 -0500, I said, "Pick a card, any card"
and CBFalconer <cbfalconer@yahoo.com> instead replied:

>Ray Haddad wrote: >> David Kelly <n4hhe@Yahoo.com> replied: >> >>> Failure to reply in the proper format will cause many to ignore >>> one's reply. If you want a reply then you will reply in the >>> format expected by those who are capable of answering. >> >> This is just plain silly. In the early days of USENET, before it >> was even called that, the norm was top posting to reply leaving >> the balance of the message for reference only. Period. > >Ridiculous misinformation. Read the rfcs. Read the following:
An RFC is not a rule. Good grief. Is that all you've got? -- Ray
On Mon, 07 Jan 2008 18:15:49 -0500, I said, "Pick a card, any card"
and CBFalconer <cbfalconer@yahoo.com> instead replied:

>msg wrote: >> >... snip ... >> >> Banning html from text-only newsgroups is a _great_ idea however. > >It already is banned. The better newsreaders can be told not to >display it.
Sadly, you can't "ban" html because it's text. That's all it is. In fact, you can't even "ban" binaries because they're converted to text before they're put on USENET. You seem blissfully unaware of the workings of newsgroups, mate. Read up on the technology before you insert your foot in your mouth any more. This is a self regulating anarchy and nothing more. Your attempts at being a NetKop are laughable and worthy of ridicule. -- Ray
Ray Haddad wrote:
> CBFalconer <cbfalconer@yahoo.com> replied: >> msg wrote: >> >>... snip ... >>> >>> Banning html from text-only newsgroups is a _great_ idea however. >> >> It already is banned. The better newsreaders can be told not to >> display it. > > Sadly, you can't "ban" html because it's text. That's all it is.
However, you can tell it from most pure text. Similarly you can tell text from arbitrary binary, most of the time. These things revolve around the definition of a 'bit', from which we can derive definitions for 'byte', 'line', 'record', etc. You are probably not aware that the better news-servers (generally European) will simply discard html messages. It is quite effective. -- Chuck F (cbfalconer at maineline dot net) <http://cbfalconer.home.att.net> Try the download section. -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
CBFalconer wrote:

> msg wrote: > > ... snip ... > >>Banning html from text-only newsgroups is a _great_ idea however. > > > It already is banned. The better newsreaders can be told not to > display it. >
I should have been more specific; news servers ought to be configured to strip html from posts made to text-only newsgroups as they often are for uuencoded material. Michael

Memfault State of IoT Report