|
> pretty much do the same thing for all applications software - the > manufacturer's site is the place to start for definitive answers. I disagree, probably because my habit is different. And I often find solutions, cheats, tips, etc. on users sites, forums, etc, that are (apparently) not available from the manufacturer. This of course reduces my tendency to search that manufacturers site specifically, and in the long run it reduces my tendency to use that manufacturers products. Wouter van Ooijen -- ------- Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: www.voti.nl consultancy, development, PICmicro products |
16F88 bootloader
Started by ●August 8, 2004
Reply by ●September 3, 20042004-09-03
Reply by ●September 3, 20042004-09-03
|
> For example, I don't look for my vacation flight to Cozumel > on Google. I use Google to find airline booking sites. There are of course grey area's. But when I am lokking for a TZDQ-457-DX chip I sure want the manufacturer (QPKX-products-incorporated in south-nowherestan) to make at least a page avaiable to google that mentions that type number. Likewise when I am looking for a house to rent for a vacation in a particular village in the Ardennes in Belgium I will use google and I expect that sites that rent such houses make very sure that I find them. Some will, and I will book ne of those :) Wouter van Ooijen -- ------- Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: www.voti.nl consultancy, development, PICmicro products |
Reply by ●September 3, 20042004-09-03
|
Sorry, have to jump in here. Mircosoft has never had an answer for me that was any more useful then the ridiculous error code I was given to begin with, if I could even get close to good search results. IMHO Microsoft is not competent to resolve anything. With 10 years and 100's of billions of dollars, Microsoft still can not make an operating system. Is it "American ingenuity" or "A sucker born every minute"? Chad --- rtstofer <> wrote: > > I don't see any reason for Microsoft to have their database indexed > by Google - I'm surprised MSDN is indexed. Sure, Google is useful > but it is indiscriminate (broadly used) returning thousands of > entries to a simple query; I can find an item related specifically > to Excel 97 or Windows XP when I search the Microsoft database. > > I don't find it difficult to realize that if I have a Microsoft > issue, I should go to the Microsoft site to find the resolution. I > pretty much do the same thing for all applications software - the > manufacturer's site is the place to start for definitive answers. > > --- In , "Wouter van Ooijen" <wouter@v...> > wrote: > > > I don't think so. Google has to index pages. It's more > > > likely to find static pages. A lot of the pages that are > available on > > a > > > database based site like the knowledge base have never been > served to > > > anyone. > > > > The 'should' in my post should be interpreted as a responsibility > of > > Microsoft :) > > > > IHMO every information provider that provides info should do make > sure > > that his info is indexed by google (and other search engines). This > > might be difficult, but not impossible. The current situation on > the > > internet is that google (on itself or with some other major search > > engines) is *the* entry to the internet. If an information > provider does > > not recognise this too bad for him, even if he is Microsoft. > > > > Recently I added a question to my internetshop's checkout > sequence 'how > > did you find me?'. Over 70% of those who filled in this field > answered > > 'google'. Mind you, not just 'searching', specifically 'google'! > > > > Wouter van Ooijen > > > > -- ------- > > Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: www.voti.nl > > consultancy, development, PICmicro products ===== My software has no bugs, only undocumented features. _______________________________ |
|
|
Reply by ●September 3, 20042004-09-03
|
I guess I will take the opposite position - I have never had an error that was unresolved. None! Ever! And I have been using Microsoft software since before it was Microsoft - remember 4K Basic for the Altair 8800? And, in my opinion, Microsoft has the best software in the world - bar none. Linux is a joke, written by amateurs and still not able to self install worth a darn. Network configuration (particularly of the firewall) is a nightmare. Configuring auto dialling comes to mind as a special case of a huge PITA. Linux supports only obsolete hardware and, because it has such a small customer base, manufacturers don't provide drivers for newer hardware. Other than as a cult thing or possibly for servers where an entire IT team can support it, configuration demands are low and one time deal, it's going nowhere. And, yes, I have tried it. Serveral incantations since the earlist 386BSD - circa 1981(?). Red Hat 7.3 was the closest to a workable Linux system I have seen. Then they decided that support would be at cost or unavailable. They summarily drop machines from the support database if they doesn't check in frequently and I'll be darned if I can even find a way to BUY an upgraded single user workstation version. Too bad, I kind of liked it but the support was non-existent. But then, Konqueror, the only decent web browser on the system, won't talk to secure sites. "We're working on it...". How in the world can they put product out the door that can't communicate? So I tried Debian - it installed more or less. But it never did talk to the embedded sound card. The answer: "don't give up, we'll get it eventually". So that version went to the trash can along with Red Hat. I can install, from scratch, a Windows XP system on the same machine and the only configuation I have to do it tell it the workgroup, ip address, gateway address, network mask (which it calculates anyway), DNS server IPs and a couple of user accounts and it's up and running. Days, if not weeks before Linux is up to speed. It's fashionable to hate Microsoft, no problem. But you need to look at the competition - there isn't any. Sure, some of it is Microsoft marketing but the fact is there has never been any company that produced the quality of product. And that was decided in the marketplace. WordPerfect and its spreadsheet cousin come to mind. Customers had the opportunity to choose among Lotus, Excel and Pardox - they chose Excel and everything else lost. You remember Lotus - the company with the absurd licensing ideas? Well, you have to go back a ways - people got fed up with the company and moved on. These decisions are made in the marketplace - the only opinion that matters. --- In , Chad Russel <chadrussel@y...> wrote: > Sorry, have to jump in here. Mircosoft has never had an answer for me > that was any more useful then the ridiculous error code I was given to > begin with, if I could even get close to good search results. > > IMHO Microsoft is not competent to resolve anything. With 10 years and > 100's of billions of dollars, Microsoft still can not make an operating > system. Is it "American ingenuity" or "A sucker born every minute"? > > Chad > --- rtstofer <rstofer@p...> wrote: > > > > > I don't see any reason for Microsoft to have their database indexed > > by Google - I'm surprised MSDN is indexed. Sure, Google is useful > > but it is indiscriminate (broadly used) returning thousands of > > entries to a simple query; I can find an item related specifically > > to Excel 97 or Windows XP when I search the Microsoft database. > > > > I don't find it difficult to realize that if I have a Microsoft > > issue, I should go to the Microsoft site to find the resolution. I > > pretty much do the same thing for all applications software - the > > manufacturer's site is the place to start for definitive answers. > > > > --- In , "Wouter van Ooijen" <wouter@v...> > > wrote: > > > > I don't think so. Google has to index pages. It's more > > > > likely to find static pages. A lot of the pages that are > > available on > > > a > > > > database based site like the knowledge base have never been > > served to > > > > anyone. > > > > > > The 'should' in my post should be interpreted as a responsibility > > of > > > Microsoft :) > > > > > > IHMO every information provider that provides info should do make > > sure > > > that his info is indexed by google (and other search engines). This > > > might be difficult, but not impossible. The current situation on > > the > > > internet is that google (on itself or with some other major search > > > engines) is *the* entry to the internet. If an information > > provider does > > > not recognise this too bad for him, even if he is Microsoft. > > > > > > Recently I added a question to my internetshop's checkout > > sequence 'how > > > did you find me?'. Over 70% of those who filled in this field > > answered > > > 'google'. Mind you, not just 'searching', specifically 'google'! > > > > > > Wouter van Ooijen > > > > > > -- ------- > > > Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: www.voti.nl > > > consultancy, development, PICmicro products > > > > > > ===== > My software has no bugs, only undocumented features. > > _______________________________ > |
|
|
Reply by ●September 3, 20042004-09-03
|
--- Chad Russel <> wrote: > Sorry, have to jump in here. Mircosoft has never > had an answer for me that was any more useful then > the ridiculous error code I was given to begin with, > if I could even get close to good search results. > > IMHO Microsoft is not competent to resolve anything. > With 10 years and 100's of billions of dollars, > Microsoft still can not make an operating system. > Is it "American ingenuity" or "A sucker born every > minute"? TIME OUT! There are American's that don't like Mr Gates anymore than you do. I feel somewhat slighted that you believe _ALL_ Americans would be associated in some way to Mr Gates monolithic software products, processes, and quality. A quote I read somewhere: A computer without a windows operating system is like a ... A dog without two bricks tied to his head. Mickey$oft has repeatedly demonstrated that they will only support what makes them money. Calling into their support line ($$$) makes money. Documenting the ins/outs and gotchas of their software has never been their strong suit, and has landed them in court on several occassions. That cryptic error message is meant to be cryptic. If there was money to be made from being helpful, MS bloatware would be much more helpful. Using google will often get you more help than you will get out of Redmond Wa. And that is without finding links to the MS databases.... Just my tuppence worth __________________________________________________ |
|
|
Reply by ●September 3, 20042004-09-03
|
Don't get me really started. :-) I ask the question is it "American ingenuity" or "A sucker born every minute"? I think Microsoft's policy is the latter. After slammer, Microsoft fixed 2 of 6 vulerable holes used. ??? That was pretty stupid, why did they take 1.5 years to close the other 4 holes one by one? Because if fixed, McAfee, Norton and a few others would have to close down. hummmmm. Makes me wonder. Give the Linux hackers 10 years and 100 billion dollars, you think there would be no improvement? What is the major advance in 10 years? XP crashes less then 95? Yeap, I'm impressed. I'm happy. I don't have to buy firewalls, antivirsus software, or send my money to Redmond. My only headaches are when I have to use a Windows program. Word is a great program, if you don't need your English spelling or grammer checked. Chad --- Mr S <> wrote: > --- Chad Russel <> wrote: > > > Sorry, have to jump in here. Mircosoft has never > > had an answer for me that was any more useful then > > the ridiculous error code I was given to begin with, > > if I could even get close to good search results. > > > > IMHO Microsoft is not competent to resolve anything. > > With 10 years and 100's of billions of dollars, > > Microsoft still can not make an operating system. > > Is it "American ingenuity" or "A sucker born every > > minute"? > > TIME OUT! > There are American's that don't like Mr Gates anymore > than you do. I feel somewhat slighted that you believe > _ALL_ Americans would be associated in some way to Mr > Gates monolithic software products, processes, and > quality. > > A quote I read somewhere: > A computer without a windows operating system is like > a ... A dog without two bricks tied to his head. > > Mickey$oft has repeatedly demonstrated that they will > only support what makes them money. Calling into their > support line ($$$) makes money. Documenting the > ins/outs and gotchas of their software has never been > their strong suit, and has landed them in court on > several occassions. That cryptic error message is > meant to be cryptic. If there was money to be made > from being helpful, MS bloatware would be much more > helpful. > > Using google will often get you more help than you > will get out of Redmond Wa. And that is without > finding links to the MS databases.... > > Just my tuppence worth > ===== My software has no bugs, only undocumented features. __________________________________ |
|
|
Reply by ●September 3, 20042004-09-03
|
Again, the decisions are made in the marketplace - you choose to buy (or whatever) some other OS? Hey, no problem. But your decision doesn't diminish the accomplishments of Microsoft or enhance those of Linux. The marketplace has spoken. Linux isn't making the cut. And why would anyone spend more money on a 1960s OS with an X- Windows overlay? Frankly, I don't know what Microsoft can do to improve Windows XP. Despite your assertions, it does not crash - ever. They could stop development right here and things would be good enough. That would give Linux the 40 years they need to catch up. Besides, it isn't about the OS, it's about the applications and how well they are integrated with the OS and each other. I have tried the office suites on Linux - they will NEVER catch up to Microsoft Office. End users don't care about the OS, the work with the apps. You really want to put MySQL up against SQL Server? Not even close! Now I will grant that Apache is a very good web server. It is excellent. I prefer Internet Information Server because of the control panel and perhaps because I understand it a little better but Apache is VERY good. PHP against ASP or ASP.NET? - again, no contest. PHP works well, ASP.NET works better. Netscape against Internet Explorer? No contest - IE has won hands down. Mozilla? A close competitor of Lynx. The marketplace has spoken. > > > __________________________________ > |
|
|
Reply by ●September 3, 20042004-09-03
|
> 1. The marketplace has spoken. 2. Linux isn't making the cut. I agree with 1. but not with 2. I teach on a university, and when the attitude of the current students is a predictor for the general future (it has often been) uSoft will have to watch out. > And why would anyone spend more money on a 1960s OS with an X- > Windows overlay? Because it is well-designed? And because you don't have to spend any significant money on it! Last week I 'sold' 20 copies of Knoppix to my students for a C course ($1 each, copying - of course - allowed). I could have used a windows-based solution instead, but then I would have to select an appropriate compiler, have them install it, ... Now they just insert a CD, boot, and everything is there. > Frankly, I don't know what Microsoft can do to improve Windows XP. > Despite your assertions, it does not crash - ever. In that case I live in never-never land. When I connect an USB-serial converter, open an application that uses the port, feed a stream of data into the port, and then close the application (while the data stream continues) my PC reboots. A solid, hard reboot. Every time. This could be called a driver problem, but in that case it is also a problem in how XP handles drivers. > Netscape against Internet Explorer? No contest I agree with that - for me Netscape has won because somehow IE on my XP system has decided that it does not want to use my Ethernet to access the internet, and there is no way to re-install just IE, and I can not find what silly setting somewhere deeply 'integrated' in XP causes this. But I keep IE because it allows me to specify that I want to print HTML without headers and footers (that is how I print my invoices), and because it has a clumsy but workeable javascript debugger (as far as I can see Netscape hasa none). Wouter van Ooijen -- ------- Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: www.voti.nl consultancy, development, PICmicro products |
|
|
Reply by ●September 3, 20042004-09-03
|
Just an FYI for everyone, not to keep a flame going, but US-CERT, US Computer Emergency Readiness Team http://www.us-cert.gov issued an advisory about 1 month ago that all not expert users should not us IE. I have lost the bookmark, you can look, or I will later. I am not sure how they have hushed this one, but they have. Latest figures show Mozilla going from 3% to 14% of browser usage in the last 18 months. I hope I am more right then wrong, because I am advising students going into computers to concentrate on Unix/Linux if they want a job in 10 years. Regards, :D Chad --- rtstofer <> wrote: > > Again, the decisions are made in the marketplace - you choose to buy > (or whatever) some other OS? Hey, no problem. But your decision > doesn't diminish the accomplishments of Microsoft or enhance those > of Linux. The marketplace has spoken. Linux isn't making the cut. > > And why would anyone spend more money on a 1960s OS with an X- > Windows overlay? > > Frankly, I don't know what Microsoft can do to improve Windows XP. > Despite your assertions, it does not crash - ever. They could stop > development right here and things would be good enough. That would > give Linux the 40 years they need to catch up. > > Besides, it isn't about the OS, it's about the applications and how > well they are integrated with the OS and each other. I have tried > the office suites on Linux - they will NEVER catch up to Microsoft > Office. End users don't care about the OS, the work with the apps. > > You really want to put MySQL up against SQL Server? Not even > close! Now I will grant that Apache is a very good web server. It > is excellent. I prefer Internet Information Server because of the > control panel and perhaps because I understand it a little better > but Apache is VERY good. PHP against ASP or ASP.NET? - again, no > contest. PHP works well, ASP.NET works better. > > Netscape against Internet Explorer? No contest - IE has won hands > down. Mozilla? A close competitor of Lynx. > > The marketplace has spoken. > ===== My software has no bugs, only undocumented features. _______________________________ |
|
|
Reply by ●September 3, 20042004-09-03
|
Absolutely! If I was teaching a C course I would try to use something fairly simple - it's about C, not the vagaries of the OS. I don't know anything about Knoppix but certainly Linux or even DOS will do the job. That's one of the reasons I am resurrecting CP/M on an FPGA. My grandson will probably learn a little bit of Basic with MBASIC-80 on a command line CP/M system (yep, Microsoft wrote that, too!). Maybe even a touch of 8080 macro assembler, Fortran 80 (Microsoft, again), Turbo Pascal and possibly PL/I (although that may be optional - no real educational value). I do have a version of C but, as I recall, it is ugly! At least it was with dual 8" floppies! The GNU stuff works very well but the option list for the C compiler is a little off-putting. Fortunately, most of it can be ignored. As to student attitudes, they reiterate what they are told. If the staff believes that Apple or Linux are the only solution, so will the students. It reminds me of a famous quotation which I can't quote correctly: If you are under 30 and aren't a liberal you have no soul and if you are over 30 and aren't a conservative you have no brain. Or: a conservative is a liberal who's been mugged. So, let them rebel a little - no harm. Eventually, the students will get out of school and join the ranks of the employed - they will use Microsoft OSs and Microsoft Office whether they like it or not. It's 10 years too late to change horses - even if there was another horse in the pasture. We really need to kill this thread. I stayed out of the discussion for a long time but the Microsoft bashing is so tiring. The same old rants, nothing ever changes. Not even new rants! If people don't like Microsoft (and some people don't like Ford) buy the competitors product. Let your money do your talking, the marketplace is listening. Heck, I have 499,000 miles on my '91 Chevy S-10. And I used to be a Chrysler kind of guy - 426 cubic in '65 Plymouth Satellite. Very fast! But then the Army got in the way... And then life got in the way... Now I have an old S-10. --- In , "Wouter van Ooijen" <wouter@v...> wrote: > > 1. The marketplace has spoken. 2. Linux isn't making the cut. > > I agree with 1. but not with 2. I teach on a university, and when the > attitude of the current students is a predictor for the general future > (it has often been) uSoft will have to watch out. > > > And why would anyone spend more money on a 1960s OS with an X- > > Windows overlay? > > Because it is well-designed? And because you don't have to spend any > significant money on it! Last week I 'sold' 20 copies of Knoppix to my > students for a C course ($1 each, copying - of course - allowed). I > could have used a windows-based solution instead, but then I would have > to select an appropriate compiler, have them install it, ... Now they > just insert a CD, boot, and everything is there. > > > Frankly, I don't know what Microsoft can do to improve Windows XP. > > Despite your assertions, it does not crash - ever. > > In that case I live in never-never land. When I connect an USB- serial > converter, open an application that uses the port, feed a stream of data > into the port, and then close the application (while the data stream > continues) my PC reboots. A solid, hard reboot. Every time. This could > be called a driver problem, but in that case it is also a problem in how > XP handles drivers. > > > Netscape against Internet Explorer? No contest > > I agree with that - for me Netscape has won because somehow IE on my XP > system has decided that it does not want to use my Ethernet to access > the internet, and there is no way to re-install just IE, and I can not > find what silly setting somewhere deeply 'integrated' in XP causes this. > But I keep IE because it allows me to specify that I want to print HTML > without headers and footers (that is how I print my invoices), and > because it has a clumsy but workeable javascript debugger (as far as I > can see Netscape hasa none). > > Wouter van Ooijen > > -- ------- > Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: www.voti.nl > consultancy, development, PICmicro products |
