From Newsgroup: sci.electronics.design

I am tired of supporting Windows machines. Life is SO much easier
(for me) under the *BSDs.

However, I am not sure SWMBO would find that to be the case.

Her uses are primarily email and WWW. I suspect Tbird is very
similar to the Windows variant. Ditto for Firefox -- though
I'm not sure how "current" support is for either of those
under each BSD. (FBSD seems to be more mainstream than NBSD
in many issues)

My biggest concern would be for add-in "extensions" that she
relies on for Firefox. Is the extension API grounded in
Firefox? Or, the host OS?

Anyone supporting someone using a *BSD desktop that can share
their experiences with problems and incompatibilities?

Meanwhile, I'll build a FBSD box and see how she takes to the idea. (thankfully, building that box means I can just pull the drive to
move it to a nicer platform -- unlike MS's braindead approach where
you have to rebuild each new instance!)
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: sci.electronics.design

Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> Wrote in message:r

I am tired of supporting Windows machines. Life is SO much easier(for me) under the *BSDs.However, I am not sure SWMBO would find that to be the case.Her uses are primarily email and WWW. I suspect Tbird is verysimilar to the Windows variant. Ditto for Firefox -- thoughI'm not sure how "current" support is for either of thoseunder each BSD. (FBSD seems to be more mainstream than NBSDin many issues)My biggest concern would be for add-in "extensions" that sherelies on for Firefox. Is the extension API grounded inFirefox? Or, the host OS?Anyone supporting someone using a *BSD desktop that can sharetheir experiences with problems and incompatibilities?Meanwhile, I'll build a FBSD box and see how she takes to the idea.(thankfully, building that box means I can just pull the drive tomove it to a nicer platform -- unlike MS's braindead approach whereyou have to rebuild each new instance!)

I looked a wubuntu, life cycle is 3 years.
Unless I read that wrong...

Cheers
--


----Android NewsGroup Reader---- https://piaohong.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/usenet/index.html
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: sci.electronics.design

On 6/10/2026 3:57 PM, Martin Rid wrote:

Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> Wrote in message:r

I am tired of supporting Windows machines. Life is SO much easier(for me) under the *BSDs.However, I am not sure SWMBO would find that to be the case.Her uses are primarily email and WWW. I suspect Tbird is verysimilar to the Windows variant. Ditto for Firefox -- thoughI'm not sure how "current" support is for either of thoseunder each BSD. (FBSD seems to be more mainstream than NBSDin many issues)My biggest concern would be for add-in "extensions" that sherelies on for Firefox. Is the extension API grounded inFirefox? Or, the host OS?Anyone supporting someone using a *BSD desktop that can sharetheir experiences with problems and incompatibilities?Meanwhile, I'll build a FBSD box and see how she takes to the idea.(thankfully, building that box means I can just pull the drive tomove it to a nicer platform -- unlike MS's braindead approach whereyou have to rebuild each new instance!)

I looked a wubuntu, life cycle is 3 years.
Unless I read that wrong...

<frown> I'm not keen on bringing in Linux; I already have to maintain Slowaris, Windows and BSD boxes -- as everyone seems to have their
own idea of how things should be done/organized (even though the
results are usually indistinguishable)

I've had four replies, thus far, each with a *different* BSD solution
(which doesn't speak well of "concensus" :< ).

So, I pulled out 4 boxes and will install a different version on each and
let her decide where she is most comfortable (I suspect the "management"
will be similar for each)
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: sci.electronics.design

On 6/11/2026 3:32 AM, Martin Brown wrote:

On 10/06/2026 22:19, Don Y wrote:

I am tired of supporting Windows machines.-a Life is SO much easier
(for me) under the *BSDs.

However, I am not sure SWMBO would find that to be the case.

Her uses are primarily email and WWW.-a I suspect Tbird is very
similar to the Windows variant.-a Ditto for Firefox -- though
I'm not sure how "current" support is for either of those
under each BSD.-a-a (FBSD seems to be more mainstream than NBSD
in many issues)

My biggest concern would be for add-in "extensions" that she
relies on for Firefox.-a Is the extension API grounded in
Firefox?-a Or, the host OS?

There is a UK seminar I'm on tomorrow dealing with how to get the great unwashed safe from the demise of Win10 in October (if it happens). My guess is
that MickeySoft will back down again and extend support - there are way too many Win10 machines still out there running quite happily.

She's annoyed that things keep changing (updates even after wiring
down all the update policies). Lately, she complained "Where is
the pin for me to keep my downloads visible?" (in Edge)

And, as I don't run W10, I end up poking around looking for it
(daring not to say she IMAGINED it being there) only to discover
that it *was* there -- but is now gone... due to an update
that "shouldn't" have occured.

[She uses W7 on her desktop so isn't real keen on why W10 "does
everything different"]

Leaning towards Linux Mint at the moment as the path of least resistance
with a front end that can look enough Windows like to make life easier
for naive users. Yet to be tried out on some brave non-geek home users.
Some groups are well ahead of us on this.

I received several recommendations (all different, of course :< )
from colleagues. All FBSD-based. I dug out a bunch of AiO's
that I had lying around and started clean installs on each
of them (so you can compare side-by-side... instead of having
to install another solution OVER something)

My file servers are FBSD-based so its not too much of a
strain to support them in addition to my NBSD workstations
(for software development). I wouldn't dream of throwing
CDE at her on a SPARC.

The seminar should be available on YouTube but the event is specifically for UK
Repair Cafe participants dealing with computer repairs.

Anyone supporting someone using a *BSD desktop that can share
their experiences with problems and incompatibilities?

The main one seems to be things being in different places. If you can provide
something looking like the same home screen, the same browser and something that behaves like Outlook then they tend not to notice
other things provided there is someone around to sort out niggles.

She uses Tbird and Firefox -- which seem to run much "snappier"
under FBSD (e.g., a 1.6GHz i5 FBSD box outperforming a 3.1GHz i7
W10 box -- *noticeably*!) The same versions as on the W10 box.

I think being able to view "videos" (VLC) and PDFs are likely the only
other things she needs on *this* machine.

[We deliberately keep *nothing* on these machines so we can
wipe them in a heartbeat if we suspect an infection -- none
to date]

And, I imagine it will be a lot easier to install a (legacy) printer
than under Windows! More of the MS tax at work...

There will be niggles. Gimp has a pretty steep learning curve compared to any
of the Windows image processing packages for instance.

Anything else will stay on her desktop machine. *That* was tedious
to build as she has stuff from her W2K days that she wanted to keep
running, there (several complex "databases" and reports)

Depending on how this works out, I may also update her laptop
(used exclusively for financial interactions)

Meanwhile, I'll build a FBSD box and see how she takes to the idea.
(thankfully, building that box means I can just pull the drive to
move it to a nicer platform -- unlike MS's braindead approach where
you have to rebuild each new instance!)

I don't find Windows all that difficult to support except on bespoke portables
like Sony and Toshiba where the custom video drivers make installing generic Windows just about impossible. Only a handful of exotic Linux distributions will install on the worst offenders.

NBSD seems to "just work" -- pulling the drive out of one machine
and installing it in another (very handy when you want to
retire a machine but not its contents).

The W10 move was necessitated by outdated browser support on W7.
A *day* installing and downloading updates. For that machine
AND the aforementioned laptop.

[BSD installs in an hour]

I have had much *more* trouble trying to mend broken Chromebooks. We haven't found a way to break into a dead one yet that doesn't involve going on a $$$$
official repairers course just to get the toolkit.

I have an old toolkit here, somewhere. A guy who worked with me on
supplying laptops to kids was an Apple person for the city. But,
I suspect it is the sort of thing that is "regularly updated"
as new models come out.

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: sci.electronics.design

On 6/11/2026 4:44 AM, Theo wrote:

Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> wrote:

I am tired of supporting Windows machines. Life is SO much easier
(for me) under the *BSDs.

However, I am not sure SWMBO would find that to be the case.

I do have a desktop running KDE and CheriBSD here (FreeBSD with hardware memory safety). I don't daily it but it seems fine. I'm not familiar with how polished the installers are on regular FreeBSD, but I think KDE is more stable than GNOME (who have taken some Linux-only pathways of late). KDE is also more Windows-like (and can be made even more so with themes).

I was playing with XFCE under 14.3 just an hour ago and it seemed
"mutable enough" that she could step into using it without too much
grief. The GUI looks a bit more "cartoonish" but that's not
important.

If you need graphics drivers (Nvidia/AMD) that can be a pain point.
Also drivers for wifi.

We don't use WiFi for anything so NOT having support for it
(on a laptop) wouldn't be a loss. I try to keep everything
cabled.

Her uses are primarily email and WWW. I suspect Tbird is very
similar to the Windows variant. Ditto for Firefox -- though
I'm not sure how "current" support is for either of those
under each BSD. (FBSD seems to be more mainstream than NBSD
in many issues)

My biggest concern would be for add-in "extensions" that she
relies on for Firefox. Is the extension API grounded in
Firefox? Or, the host OS?

They're typically written in Javascript so I don't think there should be a problem running them on a different OS. They work on Firefox for Android even though that's a completely different platform.

Ah, Great! Thanks. She often has to download videos for her
art classes. They try to make this difficult (out of fear
someone will DL all the videos and *publish* them, thereby
avoiding the course fees -- kilobucks).

Anyone supporting someone using a *BSD desktop that can share
their experiences with problems and incompatibilities?

I suspect any time she is wanting to install 'apps' then things might get tricky (depends on what's available via pkg, almost certainly less choice than on Linux), but as an mail+web appliance you might be ok.

That's the targeted environment. pkgsrc works decent, for me
(though I tend to build from sources, having my own local
"pkg factory" with an offline distfiles).

I want to keep her usage on *this* machine and her laptop
restricted to things that don't need to be backed up as
they are on a separate network so would require a separate
backup facility (to remain isolated from the unrouted
machines). Mail and URLs are relatively easy to handle,
in that regard.

If you are going to be providing tech support then it might help smooth over issues where 'just google the error message' isn't so useful as there isn't as much information out there as there is for Linux.

As long as things don't change, she is usually capable of
working on her own. The constant W10 updates are what
is prompting the abandonment of MS (the W7 machine
she uses for her desktop hasn't seen an update in years!
And, doesn't NEED any as it isn't routed)
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: sci.electronics.design

On 6/11/2026 6:17 AM, Don Y wrote:

On 6/11/2026 4:44 AM, Theo wrote:

Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> wrote:

I am tired of supporting Windows machines.-a Life is SO much easier
(for me) under the *BSDs.

However, I am not sure SWMBO would find that to be the case.

I do have a desktop running KDE and CheriBSD here (FreeBSD with hardware
memory safety).-a I don't daily it but it seems fine.-a I'm not familiar with
how polished the installers are on regular FreeBSD, but I think KDE is more >> stable than GNOME (who have taken some Linux-only pathways of late).-a KDE is
also more Windows-like (and can be made even more so with themes).

I was playing with XFCE under 14.3 just an hour ago and it seemed
"mutable enough" that she could step into using it without too much
grief.-a The GUI looks a bit more "cartoonish" but that's not
important.

And, of course, two bugs in the installer. (sigh)
Why is it that installers seem to be so bug-ridden?
They all seem to expect you to install things THEIR
way (despite the fact that there is nothing in the
systems design that imposes such a requirement!)

Thankfully, I've found workarounds (though time consuming)
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: sci.electronics.design

Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> wrote:

On 6/11/2026 4:44 AM, Theo wrote:

They're typically written in Javascript so I don't think there should be a problem running them on a different OS. They work on Firefox for Android even though that's a completely different platform.

Ah, Great! Thanks. She often has to download videos for her
art classes. They try to make this difficult (out of fear
someone will DL all the videos and *publish* them, thereby
avoiding the course fees -- kilobucks).

That may be tricky... video sites like to use DRM to prevent users doing
things they don't like. Widevine DRM is common - that needs to be compiled
for an 'official' OS, which of course FreeBSD isn't. Netflix among others
uses Widevine - there are different levels based on how much cryptographic assurance there is of your OS being official.

It seems like it can be used under FreeBSD with a browser compiled for
Linux:
https://www.freshports.org/www/linux-widevine-cdm

but not a native browser. That will probably only get you L3, the lowest security level.

OTOH it's possible that there's no actual DRM and the websites just
obfuscate the raw video stream. Youtube is one of those - at least some of
the video streams are available without DRM and there are plugins to un-obfuscate and download them (and third party apps, although can't vouch
for any under FreeBSD).

Thep
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: sci.electronics.design

On 6/11/2026 7:29 AM, Theo wrote:

Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> wrote:

On 6/11/2026 4:44 AM, Theo wrote:

They're typically written in Javascript so I don't think there should be a >>> problem running them on a different OS. They work on Firefox for Android >>> even though that's a completely different platform.

Ah, Great! Thanks. She often has to download videos for her
art classes. They try to make this difficult (out of fear
someone will DL all the videos and *publish* them, thereby
avoiding the course fees -- kilobucks).

That may be tricky... video sites like to use DRM to prevent users doing things they don't like. Widevine DRM is common - that needs to be compiled for an 'official' OS, which of course FreeBSD isn't. Netflix among others uses Widevine - there are different levels based on how much cryptographic assurance there is of your OS being official.

I don't think there is any DRM involved. If there is, they've
scripted it in the web-page as the browser has DRM disabled.

It seems like it can be used under FreeBSD with a browser compiled for
Linux:
https://www.freshports.org/www/linux-widevine-cdm

but not a native browser. That will probably only get you L3, the lowest security level.

OTOH it's possible that there's no actual DRM and the websites just
obfuscate the raw video stream. Youtube is one of those - at least some of the video streams are available without DRM and there are plugins to un-obfuscate and download them (and third party apps, although can't vouch for any under FreeBSD).

That's what I think it is -- though I have not looked into it beyond
finding an extension that seems to work properly with them.

I don't watch on-line videos so have little interest in how
they are delivered -- beyond making sure *she* can see them.

(And I imagine a screen recorder would neuter any sort of encoding
scheme as human eyes and ears interact via pixels on the screen
and sound waves from speakers)

[I think the goal is just o discourage casual "capture" -- much
like hooking the right click on a browser so you can't "Save Image As"]
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: sci.electronics.design

On 11/06/2026 13:22, John R Walliker wrote:

On 11/06/2026 11:32, Martin Brown wrote:

On 10/06/2026 22:19, Don Y wrote:

I am tired of supporting Windows machines.-a Life is SO much easier
(for me) under the *BSDs.

However, I am not sure SWMBO would find that to be the case.

Her uses are primarily email and WWW.-a I suspect Tbird is very
similar to the Windows variant.-a Ditto for Firefox -- though
I'm not sure how "current" support is for either of those
under each BSD.-a-a (FBSD seems to be more mainstream than NBSD
in many issues)

My biggest concern would be for add-in "extensions" that she
relies on for Firefox.-a Is the extension API grounded in
Firefox?-a Or, the host OS?

There is a UK seminar I'm on tomorrow dealing with how to get the
great unwashed safe from the demise of Win10 in October (if it
happens). My guess is that MickeySoft will back down again and extend
support - there are way too many Win10 machines still out there
running quite happily.

Leaning towards Linux Mint at the moment as the path of least resistance
with a front end that can look enough Windows like to make life easier
for naive users. Yet to be tried out on some brave non-geek home users.
Some groups are well ahead of us on this.

Which version do you prefer?-a I have been using the Mate edition for
years as my main machine (on a Dell laptop).-a It is VERY stable. Thunderbird, Libreoffice, Firefox and Chrome cover most "ordinary" applications.-a (Chrome sometimes works better for video conferencing.) Virtualbox gives me a Windows VM for the small amount of software that insists on using Windows.

Hi John,

That's a useful data point. We are still sat on the fence right now.
Proponents of other flavours will have their say tomorrow.

I'm hoping that tomorrows meeting might result in a clear agreed path
forward for all of the UK Repair Cafes <fx>crosses fingers</fx> so that
we can minimise how many different flavours have to be supported.

It could easily degenerate into a herding cats problem...

My money is on MS caving in again and extending the life of Win10 by yet another year but just in case they don't we need to have a plan. Last
year we made a crib sheet on how to extend Win10 support and test if
your PC could run Win11 (sadly a lot fail that arbitrary test).

Incidentally did anyone here go with Opatch?
(which claims to offer Win10 support to 2030)
--
Martin Brown

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: sci.electronics.design

On 6/11/2026 8:52 AM, Martin Brown wrote:

I'm hoping that tomorrows meeting might result in a clear agreed path forward
for all of the UK Repair Cafes <fx>crosses fingers</fx> so that we can minimise
how many different flavours have to be supported.

It could easily degenerate into a herding cats problem...

My money is on MS caving in again and extending the life of Win10 by yet another year but just in case they don't we need to have a plan. Last year we

I thought MS was already allowing folks to "sign up" for security
updates for an additional year (the amusing point being, is that a
year from the day of your install? or, a *computed* year based on
the date the message is displayed?)

made a crib sheet on how to extend Win10 support and test if your PC could run
Win11 (sadly a lot fail that arbitrary test).

Chasing MS always leads to replacing hardware. You *may* get another
release cycle -- but likely at reduced capabilities. The "tax" is
just too high, considering the lack of "productivity enhancement"
that you're buying.

[I'm looking at this W10 box with 6G of RAM in use vs. the FBSD
box I'm playing with that's got 300M on line. Both doing the same
little bit of nothing (and lamenting the days when a 386SX with a couple
meg of RAM could do this sort of thing)]> Incidentally did anyone here go with Opatch?

(which claims to offer Win10 support to 2030)

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: sci.electronics.design

Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> wrote: |----------------------------------------------------------------------------| |"On 6/11/2026 4:44 AM, Theo wrote: |

Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> wrote: |

|[. . .] | |>> My biggest concern would be for add-in "extensions" that she | |>> relies on for Firefox. Is the extension API grounded in | |>> Firefox? Or, the host OS? |

| They're typically written in Javascript so I don't think there should be a| problem running them on a different OS. They work on Firefox for Android | even though that's a completely different platform. |

| | |Ah, Great! Thanks. She often has to download videos for her | |art classes." | |----------------------------------------------------------------------------|

Avoid Chrome: "Why doesnrCOt Video DownloadHelper for Chrome allow
downloading videos from YouTube ?

Google does not allow Chrome extensions to download videos from
YouTube. If we made Video DownloadHelper for Chrome download YouTube
videos, our extension would be taken out of the Chrome WebStore.

To download Videos from YouTube, you should consider installing
Firefox then Video DownloadHelper for Firefox."
alleges
HTTPS://help.DownloadHelper.net/article/9-q-a

I use a good version of Video DownloadHelper. I do not know if it
works on FreeBSD. The last time I installed FreeBSD and NetBSD is the
Year 2008 and I quickly replaced them with different operating
systems.

yt-dlp
can also be good (but YouTube obstructs it much more effectively than
Video DownloadHelper). HTTPS://CGit.FreeBSD.org/ports/plain/www/yt-dlp/pkg-descr?revision=HEAD

|----------------------------------------------------------------------------| |"They try to make this difficult (out of fear | |someone will DL all the videos and *publish* them, thereby | |avoiding the course fees -- kilobucks)." | |----------------------------------------------------------------------------|

Perhaps you need to check a copyright law.

|----------------------------------------------------------------------------| |"[. . .] | |[. . .] The constant W10 updates are what | |is prompting the abandonment of MS (the W7 machine | |she uses for her desktop hasn't seen an update in years! | |[. . .]" | |----------------------------------------------------------------------------|

I use both Windows 10 and Windows 7 :(
Microsoft does coerce updates to Windows 7 many times a year - e.g. it
updated Windows 7 on me during this week. Microsoft is even worse at
coercing updates to Windows 10 - it updates Windows 10 much more often
and even when ordered to not update, it updates even when I am using
it thereby interrupting a job which took hours, thereby forcing me to
start a job again from scratch because an update left it in an ill
defined status.

More complaining:
HTTP://Gloucester.Insomnia247.NL/Mishort_Salachair/

Good luck! You need it!
(S. HTTP://Gloucester.Insomnia247.NL/ fuer Kontaktdaten!)
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: sci.electronics.design

Theo <theom+news@Chiark.greenEnd.org.UK> wrote: |---------------------------------------------------------------------------| |"OTOH it's possible that there's no actual DRM and the websites just | |obfuscate the raw video stream. Youtube is one of those - at least some of| |the video streams are available without DRM and there are plugins to | |un-obfuscate and download them (and third party apps, although can't vouch | |for any under FreeBSD). |
| | |Thep" | |---------------------------------------------------------------------------|

YouTube uses a technique which is other than obfuscation. Cf. for this
post I ran a few seconds ago . . .

yt-dlp 'HTTPS://WWW.YouTube.com/watch?v=PENgEeT66sA'
[generic] Extracting URL: HTTPS://WWW.YouTube.com/watch?v=PENgEeT66sA
[generic] watch?v=PENgEeT66sA: Downloading webpage
WARNING: [generic] Falling back on generic information extractor
[generic] watch?v=PENgEeT66sA: Extracting information
ERROR: Unsupported URL: https://WWW.YouTube.com/watch?v=PENgEeT66sA
/home/gloucester/temp $ yt-dlp --version
2023.03.04

Video DownloadHelper and probably a new version of yt-dlp can download
from YouTube.

(S. HTTP://Gloucester.Insomnia247.NL/ fuer Kontaktdaten!)
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: sci.electronics.design

Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> wrote: |-------------------------------------------------------------------|
|"(And I imagine a screen recorder would neuter any sort of encoding|
|scheme as human eyes and ears interact via pixels on the screen |
|and sound waves from speakers)" | |-------------------------------------------------------------------|

Screen recorders are good but inefficient even when they work.

Many websites obstruct screen recorders on Microsoft Windows (I did
not check a screen recorder with a website on a different operating
system).

An old version of BrightCove is not so awkward as a new version which
many video websites now use. Cf.
Message-ID: <215f0721-a50a-8ccc-4452-dbae983eb463@Strand_in_London.Gov.UK>
by me in news:alt.art.video from 1 year ago (reproduced below with
added line wrapping).

A successful workaround is to disable GPU acceleration in a web
browser. (E.g. Chrome, and I do advise against Chrome in an earlier contribution to this news:sci.electronics.design thread.)

E.g. I made this back up from a video with an old version of
BrightCove for a website of a TV station in 2023: HTTP://Gloucester.Insomnia247.NL/drochdhliodoiri/mu/Eirinn/Tabhair_aire/2023-11-16_BBC_Alba_air_an_TG4__Tabhair_aire.mp4

The same website later upgraded to a BrightCove which makes this
technique of screen recording impossible. Disabling GPU acceleration
in a web browser makes screen recording possible again.




Newsgroups:
alt.art.video,comp.os.ms-windows.video,rec.video, rec.video.desktop,uk.rec.video.digital,rec.video.desktop.toaster
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2025 10:38:44 +0100
Subject: ShareX and yt-dlp fail to save videos from . . .
Message-ID: <215f0721-a50a-8ccc-4452-dbae983eb463@Strand_in_London.Gov.UK>

Dear Sir/Madam,

Sorry if I am sending this to an inappropriate newsgroup, in which case
please direct me to an appropriate resource.

I emailed ShareX and Video-DownloadHelper persons like shown below. So far
I got an answer only from a Video-DownloadHelper person.

I also considered contacting yt-dlp persons but GitHub shows an open issue about these unsupported websites in question since years ago. An example
error message . . .
yt-dlp --user-agent "Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/123.0.0.0 Safari/537.36" 'https://WWW.TG4.Ie/ga/player/catagoir/nuacht/seinn/?pid=6368933861112&title=Nuacht%20TG4&series=Nuacht%20TG4&genre=Cursai%20Reatha&pcode=730945'
[generic] Extracting URL: https://WWW.TG4.Ie/ga/player/catagoir/nuacht/seinn/?pid=6368933861112&title=Nuacht%20TG4&series=N...0Reatha&pcode=730945
[generic] ?pid=6368933861112&title=Nuacht TG4&series=Nuacht
TG4&genre=Cursai Reatha&pcode=730945: Downloading webpage
WARNING: [generic] Falling back on generic information extractor
[generic] ?pid=6368933861112&title=Nuacht TG4&series=Nuacht
TG4&genre=Cursai Reatha&pcode=730945: Extracting information
[brightcove:new] Extracting URL: http://players.brightcove.net/1555966122001/HJlOg6KUz_default/index.html?videoId=6368933861112#__...pcode%3D730945%22%7D
[brightcove:new] 6368933861112: Downloading JSON metadata
ERROR: [brightcove:new] None: Access to this resource is forbidden by
access policy.

So I found webpages about recording BrightCove videos. Are they
trustworthy?

Thanks in advance.


---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2025 09:46:18 +0100
From: [. . .]@downloadhelper.net
To: Niocl|ii++|!n C||il|!n de -alo++t|-ir
Subject: Re: Video DownloadHelper is excellent but fails to record
those . . .

Hi,
Thanks for the feedback. All I can say is that we are working on a new
approach for downloads that might impact a lot of sites. But it will
still take
weeks.
[. . .]

On Tue, Feb 25, 2025, at 11:12 PM, Niocl|ii++|!n C||il|!n de -alo++t|-ir
wrote:
Salut !

HTTP://Gloucester.Insomnia247.NL/Gillian_Toole/ShareX_and_Video_DownloadHelper_and_yt-dlp_fail_to_save_videos_from_those_websites.HTM
. . .

Alas ShareX and Video DownloadHelper and yt-dlp fail to save videos from-a those websites

How can RT|e-Player videos and TG4 videos be archived well?

Many programs are not able to archive videos from-a
HTTPS://WWW.RTE.Ie/player
and
HTTPS://WWW.TG4.Ie/ga/player/catagoir/nuacht

Such ineffective programs include PrtSc (-a HTTPS://WWW.Microsoft.com/en-us/windows/learning-center/how-to-screenshot-windows-11-a
); Snipping Tool (-a
HTTPS://WWW.Microsoft.com/en-us/windows/tips/snipping-tool
); ShareX (-a
HTTPS://getShareX.org
); Video DownloadHelper (-a
HTTPS://WWW.DownloadHelper.net
); and yt-dlp (-a
HTTPS://GitHub.com/yt-dlp/yt-dlp
).

(However ShareX does record subtitles and audio. E.g.-a HTTP://Gloucester.Insomnia247.NL/Seamus_o_Ceallachain/Seamus_o_Ceallachain_ag_caint_faoi_dhunmharu_amhain_ar_an_16-02-2025.mp4-a
from-a HTTPS://WWW.TG4.Ie/ga/player/catagoir/nuacht/seinn/?pid=6368933861112&title=Nuacht%20TG4&series=Nuacht%20TG4&genre=Cursai%20Reatha&pcode=730945-a
from-a HTTPS://WWW.TG4.Ie/ga/player/catagoir/nuacht/?series=Nuacht%20TG4&genre=Cursai%20Reatha
)

(These programs do not fail to record
HTTPS://WWW.RTE.Ie/news
)

I made an inefficient recording from-a HTTPS://WWW.RTE.Ie/player/series/rt%C3%A9-news-nine-o-clock/SI0000001468?epguid=IH10008756-25-0046-a
using a different program, but do you have notions of better alternatives?-a Such an inefficient recording is at-a HTTP://Gloucester.Insomnia247.NL/Gillian_Toole/police_arresting_6_alleged_torturers_Good_night_and_take_care__20250216_105532.webm

(That RT|e webpage expired afterwards, so you can test a different news-a report hyperlined to from
HTTPS://WWW.RTE.Ie/player/all-programmes/latest-a
or-a HTTPS://WWW.TG4.Ie/ga/player/catagoir/nuacht/?series=Nuacht%20TG4&genre=Cursai%20Reatha
)

Thanks!

Is mise le meas,
Niocl|ii++|!n C||il|!n de -alo++t|-ir


(S. HTTP://Gloucester.Insomnia247.NL/ fuer Kontaktdaten!)
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: sci.electronics.design

On 6/11/2026 12:25 PM, Don Y wrote:

On 6/11/2026 8:52 AM, Martin Brown wrote:

I'm hoping that tomorrows meeting might result in a clear agreed path
forward for all of the UK Repair Cafes <fx>crosses fingers</fx> so
that we can minimise how many different flavours have to be supported.

It could easily degenerate into a herding cats problem...

My money is on MS caving in again and extending the life of Win10 by
yet another year but just in case they don't we need to have a plan.
Last year we

I thought MS was already allowing folks to "sign up" for security
updates for an additional year (the amusing point being, is that a
year from the day of your install?-a or, a *computed* year based on
the date the message is displayed?)

made a crib sheet on how to extend Win10 support and test if your PC
could run Win11 (sadly a lot fail that arbitrary test).

Chasing MS always leads to replacing hardware.-a You *may* get another release cycle -- but likely at reduced capabilities.-a The "tax" is
just too high, considering the lack of "productivity enhancement"
that you're buying.

They already built a *nix machine for the "average user", here it is:

<https://www.apple.com/imac/>
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: sci.electronics.design

On 6/11/2026 12:25 PM, Don Y wrote:

On 6/11/2026 8:52 AM, Martin Brown wrote:

I'm hoping that tomorrows meeting might result in a clear agreed path
forward for all of the UK Repair Cafes <fx>crosses fingers</fx> so
that we can minimise how many different flavours have to be supported.

It could easily degenerate into a herding cats problem...

My money is on MS caving in again and extending the life of Win10 by
yet another year but just in case they don't we need to have a plan.
Last year we

I thought MS was already allowing folks to "sign up" for security
updates for an additional year (the amusing point being, is that a
year from the day of your install?-a or, a *computed* year based on
the date the message is displayed?)

made a crib sheet on how to extend Win10 support and test if your PC
could run Win11 (sadly a lot fail that arbitrary test).

Chasing MS always leads to replacing hardware.-a You *may* get another release cycle -- but likely at reduced capabilities.-a The "tax" is
just too high, considering the lack of "productivity enhancement"
that you're buying.

They already built a *nix machine for the "average user", here it is:

<https://www.apple.com/imac/>
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: sci.electronics.design

On 6/11/2026 2:57 PM, Niocl|is P||l Caile|in de Ghloucester wrote:

Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> wrote: |-------------------------------------------------------------------|
|"(And I imagine a screen recorder would neuter any sort of encoding|
|scheme as human eyes and ears interact via pixels on the screen |
|and sound waves from speakers)" | |-------------------------------------------------------------------|

Screen recorders are good but inefficient even when they work.

Many websites obstruct screen recorders on Microsoft Windows (I did
not check a screen recorder with a website on a different operating
system).

Position a cell phone camera to record the screen.
There is ALWAYS a way of subverting anything *in* the computer.

Note, I'm not talking about pirating movies (where the quality
of the video and audio would likely be of concern to the "value"
of the experience) but, rather, making a record of a *lesson* that
was being taught.

If I was showing you how to tie a knot, would you care
about the faithfulness of the color representation?
Or, whether my narrative was in Dolby 7.1?
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: sci.electronics.design

On 6/11/2026 3:11 PM, bitrex wrote:

On 6/11/2026 12:25 PM, Don Y wrote:

On 6/11/2026 8:52 AM, Martin Brown wrote:

I'm hoping that tomorrows meeting might result in a clear agreed path
forward for all of the UK Repair Cafes <fx>crosses fingers</fx> so that we >>> can minimise how many different flavours have to be supported.

It could easily degenerate into a herding cats problem...

My money is on MS caving in again and extending the life of Win10 by yet >>> another year but just in case they don't we need to have a plan. Last year we

I thought MS was already allowing folks to "sign up" for security
updates for an additional year (the amusing point being, is that a
year from the day of your install?-a or, a *computed* year based on
the date the message is displayed?)

made a crib sheet on how to extend Win10 support and test if your PC could >>> run Win11 (sadly a lot fail that arbitrary test).

Chasing MS always leads to replacing hardware.-a You *may* get another
release cycle -- but likely at reduced capabilities.-a The "tax" is
just too high, considering the lack of "productivity enhancement"
that you're buying.

They already built a *nix machine for the "average user", here it is:

<https://www.apple.com/imac/>

The problem MS is having is that less and less is being done
using "traditional tools" on traditional platforms. We saw
desktops give way to laptops. And, laptops giving way
to cell phones.

MS is now trying to leverage use for *games*. In a market
where there is less and less variety of product offerings.

I know very few "average joes" that use "productivity suites".
I suspect businesses could drop MS with very little LONG TERM
pain (thought he transition might be chaotic). Especially
seeing the number of (identical) boxes that get tossed out
regularly. USFF and AiO's are quickly becoming the norm
as folks have decided that the space the machine occupies is more
valuable than the functionality that it provides!
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: sci.electronics.design

Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> wrote: |---------------------------------------------------------------|
|"Position a cell phone camera to record the screen." | |---------------------------------------------------------------|

Cf. this 3.69-GiB 30-minute recording: HTTP://Gloucester.Insomnia247.NL/media/Court_TV/Poblacht_mar_dhea_na_hEireann/failing_to_access_Court_TV_via_old_equipment/failing_via_old_equipment_in_Europe_to_show_Court_TV1_20260513_090155.mp4
at an absurdly high resolution and not as good as a screen recorder
would be.

FFMPEG compressed it to this 571-megabyte version: HTTP://Gloucester.Insomnia247.NL/media/Court_TV/Poblacht_mar_dhea_na_hEireann/failing_to_access_Court_TV_via_old_equipment/failing_via_old_equipment_in_Europe_to_show_Court_TV1_20260513_090155.webm

mediainfo failing_via_old_equipment_in_Europe_to_show_Court_TV1_20260513_090155.mp4 General
Complete name : failing_via_old_equipment_in_Europe_to_show_Court_TV1_20260513_090155.mp4 Format : MPEG-4
Format profile : Base Media / Version 2
Codec ID : mp42 (isom/mp42)
File size : 3.69 GiB
Duration : 30 min 37 s
Overall bit rate : 17.3 Mb/s
Frame rate : 30.000 FPS
Encoded date : 2026-05-13 08:32:34 UTC
Tagged date : 2026-05-13 08:32:34 UTC com.android.version : 8.1.0

Video
ID : 1
Format : AVC
Format/Info : Advanced Video Codec
Format profile : High@L4
Format settings : CABAC / 1 Ref Frames
Format settings, CABAC : Yes
Format settings, Reference frames : 1 frame
Format settings, GOP : M=1, N=30
Codec ID : avc1
Codec ID/Info : Advanced Video Coding
Duration : 30 min 37 s
Bit rate : 17.0 Mb/s
Width : 1 920 pixels
Height : 1 080 pixels
Display aspect ratio : 16:9
Rotation : 180-#
Frame rate mode : Variable
Frame rate : 30.000 FPS
Minimum frame rate : 15.005 FPS
Maximum frame rate : 33.015 FPS
Color space : YUV
Chroma subsampling : 4:2:0
Bit depth : 8 bits
Scan type : Progressive
Bits/(Pixel*Frame) : 0.273
Stream size : 3.64 GiB (98%)
Title : VideoHandle
Language : English
Encoded date : 2026-05-13 08:32:34 UTC
Tagged date : 2026-05-13 08:32:34 UTC
Color range : Limited
Color primaries : BT.709
Transfer characteristics : BT.709
Matrix coefficients : BT.709
Codec configuration box : avcC

Audio
ID : 2
Format : AAC LC
Format/Info : Advanced Audio Codec Low Complexity Codec ID : mp4a-40-2
Duration : 30 min 37 s
Bit rate mode : Constant
Bit rate : 256 kb/s
Channel(s) : 2 channels
Channel layout : L R
Sampling rate : 48.0 kHz
Frame rate : 46.875 FPS (1024 SPF)
Compression mode : Lossy
Stream size : 56.1 MiB (1%)
Title : SoundHandle
Language : English
Encoded date : 2026-05-13 08:32:34 UTC
Tagged date : 2026-05-13 08:32:34 UTC

|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
|"There is ALWAYS a way of subverting anything *in* the computer."| |-----------------------------------------------------------------|

Of course.

|---------------------------------------------------------------|
|"[. . .] |
|If I was showing you how to tie a knot, would you care |
|about the faithfulness of the color representation?" | |---------------------------------------------------------------|

No.

|---------------------------------------------------------------|
|"Or, whether my narrative was in Dolby 7.1?" | |---------------------------------------------------------------|

No.
(S. HTTP://Gloucester.Insomnia247.NL/ fuer Kontaktdaten!)
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: sci.electronics.design

Bitrex <user@example.net> wrote: |----------------------------------------------------------------------|
|"They already built a *nix machine for the "average user", here it is:|
| |
| <https://www.apple.com/imac/> " | |----------------------------------------------------------------------|

A new coworker arrived with an OS-X Apple Macintosh in 2005. I asked
him is Apple OS X a BSD. He did not know.
(S. HTTP://Gloucester.Insomnia247.NL/ fuer Kontaktdaten!)
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: sci.electronics.design

Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> wrote: |--------------------------------------------------------------------------| |"On 6/11/2026 3:32 AM, Martin Brown wrote: |

On 10/06/2026 22:19, Don Y wrote: |

|[. . .] |

There is a UK seminar I'm on tomorrow dealing with how to get the great | unwashed safe from the demise of Win10 in October (if it |

|happens). My guess is |

that MickeySoft will back down again and extend support - there are |

|way too |

many Win10 machines still out there running quite happily." |

|--------------------------------------------------------------------------|

Do you really suspect that Microsoft will support Windows 10 again? I
support an application for an old version of Windows (e.g. Windows
10). A compiler for Windows uses link.exe from MS SDK (also available
from Microsoft Visual Studio). A person with the same compiler wrote
for me:

"The older VS versions are compatible with
more older Oses, but that doesn't matter much to you (although I probably
would avoid the most recent one if you want to be sure to run on Windows 10 since Windows 10 is officially out of support).

Hope this helps."

What do you think?

|--------------------------------------------------------------------------| |"She's annoyed that things keep changing (updates even after wiring | |down all the update policies). Lately, she complained "Where is | |the pin for me to keep my downloads visible?" (in Edge) | |[. . .] | |[She uses W7 on her desktop so isn't real keen on why W10 "does | |everything different"] | |[. . .] |
|I received several recommendations (all different, of course :< ) | |[. . .] | |>> Anyone supporting someone using a *BSD desktop that can share | |>> their experiences with problems and incompatibilities? |

| The main one seems to be things being in different places. [. . .]" |

|--------------------------------------------------------------------------|

A different version of an operating system annoyingly forces a
different presentation. A different version of a web browser (or a
word processor) has a different presentation: e.g. a new version of a
web browser has dots and right clicks instead of a menu which is
always visible with "File" etc.

UNIX's pro-choice stance is overrated.

|--------------------------------------------------------------------------| |"[. . .] | |And, I imagine it will be a lot easier to install a (legacy) printer | |than under Windows! More of the MS tax at work..." | |--------------------------------------------------------------------------|

I recommend my "Canon Pixma GM4050 Printer Mono Print Multi-Function
MegaTank Wireless". Canon offers supports therefor for Apple iOS (and
Google Android and Microsoft Windows) - BUT NOT APPLE MACOS AND
B.S.D.S!

I print thousands of pages of texts in 1 year. She probably wants a
color graphical printer instead - a different Canon MegaTank printer
may suit her.

|--------------------------------------------------------------------------| |"[. . .] | |>> Meanwhile, I'll build a FBSD box and see how she takes to the idea. | |>> (thankfully, building that box means I can just pull the drive to | |>> move it to a nicer platform -- unlike MS's braindead approach where | |>> you have to rebuild each new instance!)" | |--------------------------------------------------------------------------|

Microsoft is not braindead to start off being not particularly rich to
becoming very rich.

(S. HTTP://Gloucester.Insomnia247.NL/ fuer Kontaktdaten!)
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: sci.electronics.design

On Thu, 11 Jun 2026 16:52:05 +0100, Martin Brown
<'''newspam'''@nonad.co.uk> wrote:

It could easily degenerate into a herding cats problem...

Trust, but verify. Cats can be herded. Just ask EDS (an HP company): <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m_MaJDK3VNE>
--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
PO Box 272 http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Ben Lomond CA 95005-0272 AE6KS 831-336-2558

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: sci.electronics.design

On 6/11/2026 5:26 PM, Niocl|is P||l Caile|in de Ghloucester wrote:

Bitrex <user@example.net> wrote: |----------------------------------------------------------------------| |"They already built a *nix machine for the "average user", here it is:|
| |
| <https://www.apple.com/imac/> " | |----------------------------------------------------------------------|

A new coworker arrived with an OS-X Apple Macintosh in 2005. I asked
him is Apple OS X a BSD. He did not know.

Apple built a lot on the FreeBSD codebase. JKH moved from
the FBSD core team to Apple, IIRC. Likely enticed for
that purpose.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: sci.electronics.design

On 6/11/2026 6:04 PM, Niocl|is P||l Caile|in de Ghloucester wrote:

Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> wrote: |--------------------------------------------------------------------------| |"On 6/11/2026 3:32 AM, Martin Brown wrote: |

On 10/06/2026 22:19, Don Y wrote: |

|[. . .] |

There is a UK seminar I'm on tomorrow dealing with how to get the great | unwashed safe from the demise of Win10 in October (if it |

|happens). My guess is |

that MickeySoft will back down again and extend support - there are |

|way too |

many Win10 machines still out there running quite happily." |

|--------------------------------------------------------------------------|

Do you really suspect that Microsoft will support Windows 10 again? I
support an application for an old version of Windows (e.g. Windows
10). A compiler for Windows uses link.exe from MS SDK (also available
from Microsoft Visual Studio). A person with the same compiler wrote
for me:

"The older VS versions are compatible with
more older Oses, but that doesn't matter much to you (although I probably would avoid the most recent one if you want to be sure to run on Windows 10 since Windows 10 is officially out of support).

Hope this helps."

What do you think?

You really only need manufacturer support if:
- your machine is out-facing
- there are "features" that are broken beyond the point where you can
make use of them (and, presumably, NEED them)

I have several W7 machines that have been gleefully supporting a
variety of applications for more than a decade. I tolerate the
bugs in those applications (instead of TRADING them for a set of
UNKNOWN bugs).

But, that network isn't routed so the threat to the machines on that
network is minimal. The greater risk would be a power supply
failing or a disk sled breaking and replacements being difficult
to find.

If "others" were using my machines, I might have more concern
as I couldn't stop them from installing crap on them.

|--------------------------------------------------------------------------| |"She's annoyed that things keep changing (updates even after wiring | |down all the update policies). Lately, she complained "Where is | |the pin for me to keep my downloads visible?" (in Edge) | |[. . .] | |[She uses W7 on her desktop so isn't real keen on why W10 "does | |everything different"] | |[. . .] | |I received several recommendations (all different, of course :< ) | |[. . .] | |>> Anyone supporting someone using a *BSD desktop that can share | |>> their experiences with problems and incompatibilities? |

| The main one seems to be things being in different places. [. . .]" |

|--------------------------------------------------------------------------|

A different version of an operating system annoyingly forces a
different presentation. A different version of a web browser (or a
word processor) has a different presentation: e.g. a new version of a
web browser has dots and right clicks instead of a menu which is
always visible with "File" etc.

Its not just the UI/UX but, also, their support for evolving
protocol standards. I built the W10 machine when the (ancient)
browser running on its W7 predecessor could no longer render
many (commercial) web sites.

In hindsight, I could have installed a more current version
of the browser on a *BSD box and avoided MS entirely (which
is the route I have now taken)

UNIX's pro-choice stance is overrated.

|--------------------------------------------------------------------------| |"[. . .] | |And, I imagine it will be a lot easier to install a (legacy) printer | |than under Windows! More of the MS tax at work..." | |--------------------------------------------------------------------------|

I recommend my "Canon Pixma GM4050 Printer Mono Print Multi-Function
MegaTank Wireless". Canon offers supports therefor for Apple iOS (and
Google Android and Microsoft Windows) - BUT NOT APPLE MACOS AND
B.S.D.S!

I print thousands of pages of texts in 1 year. She probably wants a
color graphical printer instead - a different Canon MegaTank printer
may suit her.

We don't print much. A case of paper (10 reams) will last us a few
years. Any "high quality" printing we do at the service bureau
down the street (let THEM maintain the printers!). Any high
*quantity* printing we send to the local library up the road for
10c/page.

Most of our printing is along the lines of:
- "I've got a list of things that I want to examine with pen/pencil"
- "I have a recipe that I want to make, tonight"
- "I want to make a label for a box and a magic marker would be tacky"

We have a pair of HP LJ5p's (or maybe 6p?) -- low temperature lasers.
I think we get about 5000 pp out of a toner cartridge.

|--------------------------------------------------------------------------| |"[. . .] | |>> Meanwhile, I'll build a FBSD box and see how she takes to the idea. | |>> (thankfully, building that box means I can just pull the drive to | |>> move it to a nicer platform -- unlike MS's braindead approach where | |>> you have to rebuild each new instance!)" | |--------------------------------------------------------------------------|

Microsoft is not braindead to start off being not particularly rich to becoming very rich.

Its called an "externality" -- shifting the cost onto someone else.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: sci.electronics.design

On 6/11/2026 7:06 PM, Don Y wrote:

On 6/11/2026 3:11 PM, bitrex wrote:

On 6/11/2026 12:25 PM, Don Y wrote:

On 6/11/2026 8:52 AM, Martin Brown wrote:

I'm hoping that tomorrows meeting might result in a clear agreed
path forward for all of the UK Repair Cafes <fx>crosses fingers</fx>
so that we can minimise how many different flavours have to be
supported.

It could easily degenerate into a herding cats problem...

My money is on MS caving in again and extending the life of Win10 by
yet another year but just in case they don't we need to have a plan.
Last year we

I thought MS was already allowing folks to "sign up" for security
updates for an additional year (the amusing point being, is that a
year from the day of your install?-a or, a *computed* year based on
the date the message is displayed?)

made a crib sheet on how to extend Win10 support and test if your PC
could run Win11 (sadly a lot fail that arbitrary test).

Chasing MS always leads to replacing hardware.-a You *may* get another
release cycle -- but likely at reduced capabilities.-a The "tax" is
just too high, considering the lack of "productivity enhancement"
that you're buying.

They already built a *nix machine for the "average user", here it is:

<https://www.apple.com/imac/>

The problem MS is having is that less and less is being done
using "traditional tools" on traditional platforms.-a We saw
desktops give way to laptops.-a And, laptops giving way
to cell phones.

MS is now trying to leverage use for *games*.-a In a market
where there is less and less variety of product offerings.

I know very few "average joes" that use "productivity suites".
I suspect businesses could drop MS with very little LONG TERM
pain (thought he transition might be chaotic).-a Especially
seeing the number of (identical) boxes that get tossed out
regularly.-a USFF and AiO's are quickly becoming the norm
as folks have decided that the space the machine occupies is more
valuable than the functionality that it provides!

The only "apps" of substance I really run on the OS these days are like
KiCad, LTSpice, and Studio One/Fender Studio for audio/video. And
Microsoft is only needed for the last one.

Parts/inventory management is in the cloud, email is in the cloud,
accounting is in the cloud, document editing is in the could (though I
use R Studio and LibreOFfice sometimes, but MS is not necessary), Github
is in the cloud, VS Code is _basically_ in the cloud. With regular
multipoint local backups of all the important stuff of course.

Oh, I use Mathematica sometimes on Windows, though it's not really
necessary.

This is probably my last Windows laptop, I'm only still using it because
it's a pain to get a new laptop and transfer everything all over and I'm
kinda busy lately.

I have a 16 y/o iMac in the "technology museum" which is still
surprisingly usable, running Snow Leopard or Lion or something, though I
don't think I'd want to connect it to the Internet.

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: sci.electronics.design

On 12/06/2026 03:43, Don Y wrote:

On 6/11/2026 6:04 PM, Niocl|is P||l Caile|in de Ghloucester wrote:

Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> wrote:
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------| >> |"On 6/11/2026 3:32 AM, Martin Brown
wrote:-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a |

On 10/06/2026 22:19, Don Y

wrote:-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a |
|[. .
.]-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a |

There is a UK seminar I'm on tomorrow dealing with how to get the

great |

unwashed safe from the demise of Win10 in October (if

it-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a |
|happens). My guess
is-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a |

that MickeySoft will back down again and extend support - there

are-a-a-a-a |
|way
too-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a |

many Win10 machines still out there running quite

happily."-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a |
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------| >>
Do you really suspect that Microsoft will support Windows 10 again? I
support an application for an old version of Windows (e.g. Windows
10). A compiler for Windows uses link.exe from MS SDK (also available
from Microsoft Visual Studio). A person with the same compiler wrote
for me:

"The older VS versions are compatible with
more older Oses, but that doesn't matter much to you (although I probably
would avoid the most recent one if you want to be sure to run on
Windows 10
since Windows 10 is officially out of support).

Hope this helps."

What do you think?

You really only need manufacturer support if:
- your machine is out-facing
- there are "features" that are broken beyond the point where you can
-a make use of them (and, presumably, NEED them)

I have several W7 machines that have been gleefully supporting a
variety of applications for more than a decade.-a I tolerate the
bugs in those applications (instead of TRADING them for a set of
UNKNOWN bugs).

I have original machines in working condition back to Win Vista for
support and certain ancient hardware custom IO, SCSI slide scanner for
which no modern support exists. They are totally unsafe if connected to
the outside world. Likewise many blue chip companies and universities
have multimillion pound machines hung off a geriatric PC (with a spare
in a cupboard somewhere). Typical lifecycle of really big science kit is around 20-25 years (ie Windows ME kit still running in places).

Such antiques have to be very carefully firewalled from the corporate
network.

The threat to all of us is that if MickeySoft pulls support for Win10
and some really nasty malware gets into such a widely used OS the
firestorm will do an enormous amount of damage. UK NHS has an incredible amount of vulnerable kit and underpaid inadequate IT staff for instance.

If they do pull the plug I expect an explosion of ransomeware attacks.

But, that network isn't routed so the threat to the machines on that
network is minimal.-a The greater risk would be a power supply
failing or a disk sled breaking and replacements being difficult
to find.

If "others" were using my machines, I might have more concern
as I couldn't stop them from installing crap on them.

On MS Windows the preview rendering engine of emails in Outlook is sufficiently risky that I wouldn't ever want to use it.

|--------------------------------------------------------------------------| >> |"She's annoyed that things keep changing (updates even after
wiring-a-a-a-a-a-a |
|down all the update policies).-a Lately, she complained "Where
is-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a |
|the pin for me to keep my downloads visible?" (in
Edge)-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a |
|[. .
.]-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a |
|[She uses W7 on her desktop so isn't real keen on why W10
"does-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a |
|everything
different"]-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a |
|[. .
.]-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a |
|I received several recommendations (all different, of course :<
)-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a |
|[. .
.]-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a |

Anyone supporting someone using a *BSD desktop that can

share-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a |

their experiences with problems and

incompatibilities?-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a |

-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a |
The main one seems to be things being in different places. [. .

.]"-a-a-a-a |
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------| >>
A different version of an operating system annoyingly forces a
different presentation. A different version of a web browser (or a
word processor) has a different presentation: e.g. a new version of a
web browser has dots and right clicks instead of a menu which is
always visible with "File" etc.

Its not just the UI/UX but, also, their support for evolving
protocol standards.-a I built the W10 machine when the (ancient)
browser running on its W7 predecessor could no longer render
many (commercial) web sites.

W11 is slightly better. I skipped Win10 apart from one machine that I
upgraded to be able to test and support code in that environment.

I print thousands of pages of texts in 1 year. She probably wants a
color graphical printer instead - a different Canon MegaTank printer
may suit her.

We don't print much.-a A case of paper (10 reams) will last us a few
years.-a Any "high quality" printing we do at the service bureau
down the street (let THEM maintain the printers!).-a Any high
*quantity* printing we send to the local library up the road for
10c/page.

Of the ones currently available with third party toner the Xerox Phaser
6510 is about the cheapest near photoreal colour laser on the market.
The right choice of HP heavy weight paper and the output is
indistinguishable from a print bureau brochure.

Before that I had a Dell 1230c which I had from new and bought a second
one from a junk dealer just to get the OEM toners. I got a working print engine too which extended heavy use life to 12 years before it finally expired. That was about the first half decent photoreal laser.

Most of our printing is along the lines of:
- "I've got a list of things that I want to examine with pen/pencil"
- "I have a recipe that I want to make, tonight"
- "I want to make a label for a box and a magic marker would be tacky"

We have a pair of HP LJ5p's (or maybe 6p?) -- low temperature lasers.
I think we get about 5000 pp out of a toner cartridge.

The print engines on those are almost indestructible. Our VH has one
since about 2006 (it gets nothing like the hammer that mine do).
--
Martin Brown

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: sci.electronics.design

Martin Brown <'''newspam'''@Nonad.co.UK> wrote: |------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|"I have original machines in working condition back to Win Vista for | |support and certain ancient hardware custom IO, SCSI slide scanner for | |which no modern support exists. They are totally unsafe if connected to |
|the outside world. [. . .]" | |------------------------------------------------------------------------|

I use Windows Vista. No one cracks into this Windows-Vista computer,
but maybe I am not near the front of the queue.

I do not compile on it, but as I do support Windows 10, then maybe it
would be convenient to choose a version of link.exe from MS SDK or
Visual Studio which is compatible with Windows Vista. If I may dare to
ask, what version or versions - if any - do you use?
(S. HTTP://Gloucester.Insomnia247.NL/ fuer Kontaktdaten!)
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: sci.electronics.design

On 6/12/2026 2:50 AM, Martin Brown wrote:

8<

I have several W7 machines that have been gleefully supporting a
variety of applications for more than a decade.-a I tolerate the
bugs in those applications (instead of TRADING them for a set of
UNKNOWN bugs).

I have original machines in working condition back to Win Vista for support and
certain ancient hardware custom IO, SCSI slide scanner for which no modern support exists.

I've moved most of my legacy *software* into VMs (I run VMware and a
pair of ESXi servers with ~100T of VMs).

For legacy hardware, I keep a Compaq Portable 386 w/ expansion chassis
(gives me two ISA slots!).

I also have several Neoware SBCs (X terminals in their original use) that
give me a single PCI slot which I can use for a SCSI/SAS HBA to interface
to old slide/film scanners (predate USB), ICEs, etc.

[Things like the ICEs are finally finding their way to the tip as I have
no more need to support old hardware projects. Distressing to consider
how many dozens of kilobucks they represent]

They are totally unsafe if connected to the outside world.

Undoubtedly. *NON* of my kit talks to the outside world besides
*this* machine (soon to be replaced with the aforementioned BSD
box -- solely for email and WWW) and a laptop reserved for financial transactions.

Likewise many blue chip companies and universities have multimillion pound machines hung off a geriatric PC (with a spare in a cupboard somewhere). Typical lifecycle of really big science kit is around 20-25 years (ie Windows
ME kit still running in places).

A colleague used to buy up old Sun "big iron" as his employer's
enterprise was built on their products. His office looked like
a computer museum -- all that kit "on hand" for the day when it
would be needed to replace something that was already in service.

Hospitals and many manufacturing entities (think CNC machines) are
similarly reliant on ancient hardware (a firm using Apple ]['s to
host their embedded process control systems -- like my Sun friend,
they were always on the hunt for obsolete kit from yard sales, etc.
That's what happens when engineers design stuff for their own
convenience without thinking past the "design" stage)

[One of the reasons I test my software on several different hardware
target *families* is to be sure it's not tied to the family chosen
at initial deployment -- hardware is cheap and easy to design and
replace; but retooling all the software is an epic challenge!]

Such antiques have to be very carefully firewalled from the corporate network.

The threat to all of us is that if MickeySoft pulls support for Win10 and some
really nasty malware gets into such a widely used OS the firestorm will do an
enormous amount of damage. UK NHS has an incredible amount of vulnerable kit and underpaid inadequate IT staff for instance.

This has forever been a problem. Recall XP's retirement?

If they do pull the plug I expect an explosion of ransomeware attacks.

But, that network isn't routed so the threat to the machines on that
network is minimal.-a The greater risk would be a power supply
failing or a disk sled breaking and replacements being difficult
to find.

If "others" were using my machines, I might have more concern
as I couldn't stop them from installing crap on them.

On MS Windows the preview rendering engine of emails in Outlook is sufficiently
risky that I wouldn't ever want to use it.

Aside from the OS, we use nothing of MS's, here. SWMBO is under strict
orders not to open attachments, even if (apparently) from "friends".
We browse and read PDFs in a sandbox, etc.

And, every 6 months, I pull the disk out of the outfacing machines,
set them aside and reinstall the original image. Then, run a malware scan
of the disk pulled 6 months before that (hoping that the scanners
have matured to detect anything that may have been 0 day at the time THAT
disk was pulled, 6 months earlier). Just provides some belated reassurance that we've not been used as a CnC for some botnet.

A different version of an operating system annoyingly forces a
different presentation. A different version of a web browser (or a
word processor) has a different presentation: e.g. a new version of a
web browser has dots and right clicks instead of a menu which is
always visible with "File" etc.

Its not just the UI/UX but, also, their support for evolving
protocol standards.-a I built the W10 machine when the (ancient)
browser running on its W7 predecessor could no longer render
many (commercial) web sites.

W11 is slightly better. I skipped Win10 apart from one machine that I upgraded
to be able to test and support code in that environment.

As I haven't bought any Windows-hosted tools in ages, I can
skip entire release cycles -- save for WWW/SMTP use.

I print thousands of pages of texts in 1 year. She probably wants a
color graphical printer instead - a different Canon MegaTank printer
may suit her.

We don't print much.-a A case of paper (10 reams) will last us a few
years.-a Any "high quality" printing we do at the service bureau
down the street (let THEM maintain the printers!).-a Any high
*quantity* printing we send to the local library up the road for
10c/page.

Of the ones currently available with third party toner the Xerox Phaser 6510 is
about the cheapest near photoreal colour laser on the market. The right choice
of HP heavy weight paper and the output is indistinguishable from a print bureau brochure.

Before that I had a Dell 1230c which I had from new and bought a second one from a junk dealer just to get the OEM toners. I got a working print engine too
which extended heavy use life to 12 years before it finally expired. That was
about the first half decent photoreal laser.

I used to have several (solid ink) Phasers with duplexers. *Delightful* results. But, the house would smell like burnt crayons whenever I
used them. I would build a queue of materials that I needed "quality"
prints and spend a day printing them.

The ink was outrageously expensive and the printer's startup cycle
wastes a lot of it.

And, they are BIG printers -- like stack a pair of full sized lasers
to get one Phaser!

I now have a pair of KRMs where one had resided; an SB2000 for the other.
Much better uses of space.

Most of our printing is along the lines of:
- "I've got a list of things that I want to examine with pen/pencil"
- "I have a recipe that I want to make, tonight"
- "I want to make a label for a box and a magic marker would be tacky"

We have a pair of HP LJ5p's (or maybe 6p?) -- low temperature lasers.
I think we get about 5000 pp out of a toner cartridge.

The print engines on those are almost indestructible. Our VH has one since about 2006 (it gets nothing like the hammer that mine do).

They are nice because they don't eat a lot of power keeping their
fusers "hot" when not in use. So, I can just leave them
running (on single-port print servers) to access when needed -- one
on the exposed network and the other on the airgapped network)

I've taken to using larger (18") tablets as "ePaper" for the
times I just want to carry some information away from a computer.

My next goal is to set up a ("no service") phone to replace the
countless "little slips of paper" (3"x3") on which we leave
brief, inconsequential notes (grocery lists, reminders to call
people, addresses, etc.) that never seem to find their way into
the trash...

And, finish scanning the rest of my textbooks!
Toner cartridges are the bigger hassle as they are long out of
production. And, support in mainstream OSs (you could still get
support for them under W7 but W10 seems to deny their existence)
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: sci.electronics.design

On 6/11/2026 10:35 PM, bitrex wrote:

MS is now trying to leverage use for *games*.-a In a market
where there is less and less variety of product offerings.

I know very few "average joes" that use "productivity suites".
I suspect businesses could drop MS with very little LONG TERM
pain (thought he transition might be chaotic).-a Especially
seeing the number of (identical) boxes that get tossed out
regularly.-a USFF and AiO's are quickly becoming the norm
as folks have decided that the space the machine occupies is more
valuable than the functionality that it provides!

The only "apps" of substance I really run on the OS these days are like KiCad,
LTSpice, and Studio One/Fender Studio for audio/video. And Microsoft is only needed for the last one.

The variety and quality of MS-hosted apps tends to be much better
than their FOSS counterparts. One has (historically) had access to capabilities/tools, there, long before the FOSS community gets
around to developing something comparable. E.g., I was doing 3D
CAD (under a DOS extender) back in ~1990; schematic capture in the
early 80's, PCB layout in the same timeframe, etc.

Parts/inventory management is in the cloud, email is in the cloud, accounting
is in the cloud, document editing is in the could (though I use R Studio and LibreOFfice sometimes, but MS is not necessary), Github is in the cloud, VS Code is _basically_ in the cloud. With regular multipoint local backups of all
the important stuff of course.

I don't let anything outside of my direct physical control.
I don't want to have to rely on connectivity for anything but
those things that require it (email/WWW). Its easier for me to
just set up a server to address a specific need (e.g., my
repository lets me archive ANY binary, not just my own sources;
similarly for VMs, etc.)

There's just WAY too much content to be moving copies of it
into/out of the house!

Oh, I use Mathematica sometimes on Windows, though it's not really necessary.

This is probably my last Windows laptop, I'm only still using it because it's a
pain to get a new laptop and transfer everything all over and I'm kinda busy lately.

I only use a laptop when traveling (something I have been trying to
avoid, as I get older). There, an email and http client -- plus a
copy of FrameMaker (as I am *always* busy preparing documents and
it is a relatively portable task)

I have a 16 y/o iMac in the "technology museum" which is still surprisingly usable, running Snow Leopard or Lion or something, though I don't think I'd want to connect it to the Internet.

My oldest "PC" is a Compaq Portable 386, kept for the ISA card
support it provides me. I keep a Sun Voyager and SB2000 for
access to SPARC hardware (and the tools that let me verify
my code on it).

I have a LOT of tools. I've made an effort to keep everything that
I've accumulated, over the years, operational. (This because I could,
in theory, be tasked with supporting a past project at any time.)

[I have a similar "hoarder" attitude with hand tools; if I *once*
had a need for it, then its likely that I may need it again! So,
find a place to store it until that day comes.]

Many of them are Windows based. Some SOLARIS, some BSD, etc. All
of my UN*X boxen run headless; they are accessed via RDP, VNC or
X servers running on the Windows machines. This so I can blend
the use of each type of tool at a single display station. E.g.,
cut and paste snippets of code developed on a UN*X box into a
document I am preparing under Windows.

They are grouped into 4 broad categories:
- Document preparation
- CAD/EDA
- Software Design
- Multimedia authoring
each served by a different (identical) machine.

Of my "work" time, about 40-60% is spent doing document prep.
Generating text, illustrations, charts, etc. Recording results
of tests, etc. This usually calls on tools from each of the other
groups (e.g., pasting a portion of a schematic or layout into a
document; creating an animation to illustrate some process or
concept; preparing audio snippets where prose would not be an
effective way of describing what something sounds like, etc.)

I *live* in FrameMaker and rely heavily on the Adobe suite for
photo editing, illustration, etc. Other tools to let me create
typefaces ("fonts") for documents that don't rely solely on ASCII
glyphs (e.g., my speech synthesizer required a commingling of IPA
and dingbat symbols along with regular text). I keep all of the
typefaces I've acquired over the years -- a few hundred MB -- "on
line" as browsing OFF-LINE typefaces is a colossally impractical
waste of time: much easier to just LOOK at them "live". Ditto
clipart.

The same applies to EDA/CAD with the various symbol and footprint
libraries, datasheets/manuals, 3D models, etc. I've tried to
make EVERYTHING accessible just by opening a network connection
(NFS, SMB, etc.) instead of digging through physical media.

[In the past, I maintained ONE machine with removable disk
drives that I would plug, as needed, and store "cold". Now,
even that is tedious so I just add spindles to machines rescued
solely for the convenience of accessing them at will (I have
well over 100 spindles that I could spin up, at the same time,
if the house's electrical and cooling system could handle the
load!)]

I use Windows-based GUI tools to maintain my [sic] "databases"
(which are hosted on BSD boxen). Data entry is just so much more
convenient in that environment. And, ERDs are so much simpler to
create in a WYSIWYG environment. Ditto MathCAD, MatLAB, Mathematica,
Octave, etc.

I have scores of Windows/DOS-hosted asssemblers/compilers/debuggers
for the various processors I've used or evaluated for projects, over
the years. Ditto, source libraries. But, do most of my 9-to-5
software development under NetBSD with some special validation tools
(e.g., certified compilers, symbolic execution, analysis tools)
hosted under FreeBSD as it's "cheaper" to run a different OS than
it would be to port those toold over to NetBSD. And, periodic
jaunts over to Slowaris /et ilk/ to make sure my code isn't relying
on aspects of one particular hardware architecture -- in case I
decide to deploy on different hardware)

My VCSs run on separate servers with Windows and UN*X clients
so I can check in/out from whichever environment is most
convenient. Note that I can "afford" to use lower performing
"servers" as there's only *one* human client!

[I actually have development tools installed on my router so
I can access them without having to bring a bigger machine
on-line. As *it* runs 24/7/365, its a great place to do things
like "make world" without having to leave another box running
for just that purpose!]

I build animations and videos to illustrate certain issues in
a more intuitive manner (e.g., how the geometry of your vocal
tract changes when you make certain utterances or how a process
is migrated from one host to another, while running) where prose
and static illustrations are inadequate. If the goal is to
ensure the reader understands the material, then find the most
intuitive way to convey it!

[PDFs have hidden value in that you can embed audio, video
and "supplemental payloads" in them making them a versatile
"container format"]

I have a "digital audio synthesizer" in my current project that I
can profile with certain windows tools to verify I've configured
the synthesizer in a particular way.

I even have production video capabilities (e.g., television studio
kit) so I can do things like superimpose one live video stream onto
another, in real time, and add computer graphics to the mix (though
I recently retired the video cameras as they were very large in their shipping/travel cases -- about twice the size of a little "dorm"
refrigerator!)

Most of my networking tools are NetBSD hosted - though I have a couple
that are Windows related (i.e., know all about Windows specifics)
that run on Windows hosts.

I.e., it would be *beyond* PAINFULLY expensive to move all of these
tools to another (Windows) OS -- esp when that move doesn't BUY me
anything (and likely will cause some tools to stop working and others
to require relicensing). I still lament the loss of After Dark
(but don't have the time to develop a shim for it)! :<

Just the idea of having to feed (literally) hundreds of CDs/DVDs
of fonts, clipart, 3D models, libraries, etc. into another machine
(having already done so) to "install" them is daunting. (though
I have been copying *ISOs* of those media to a server to make
such a task a bit easier to script)


--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: sci.electronics.design

On 6/12/2026 10:32 AM, Don Y wrote:

On 6/11/2026 10:35 PM, bitrex wrote:

I have a 16 y/o iMac in the "technology museum" which is still surprisingly >> usable, running Snow Leopard or Lion or something, though I don't think I'd >> want to connect it to the Internet.

My oldest "PC" is a Compaq Portable 386, kept for the ISA card
support it provides me.-a I keep a Sun Voyager and SB2000 for
access to SPARC hardware (and the tools that let me verify
my code on it).

The Compaq lets me host an Opus PM (and the tools I have that
run under it) and the SB2000 lets me host a Chimera II
(for the novelty as well as *hardware* hosting of REALLY old
MS stuff -- I think it is currently configured with W95
tools from a really old project)

[And, Oracle Developer Studio, Sun Workshop, etc. on the native SB2000]

I chuckle wondering how well I'll be able to juggle all the
subtleties of *using* these different platforms as I age!
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: sci.electronics.design

On 6/12/2026 1:32 PM, Don Y wrote:

On 6/11/2026 10:35 PM, bitrex wrote:

MS is now trying to leverage use for *games*.-a In a market
where there is less and less variety of product offerings.

I know very few "average joes" that use "productivity suites".
I suspect businesses could drop MS with very little LONG TERM
pain (thought he transition might be chaotic).-a Especially
seeing the number of (identical) boxes that get tossed out
regularly.-a USFF and AiO's are quickly becoming the norm
as folks have decided that the space the machine occupies is more
valuable than the functionality that it provides!

The only "apps" of substance I really run on the OS these days are
like KiCad, LTSpice, and Studio One/Fender Studio for audio/video. And
Microsoft is only needed for the last one.

The variety and quality of MS-hosted apps tends to be much better
than their FOSS counterparts.-a One has (historically) had access to capabilities/tools, there, long before the FOSS community gets
around to developing something comparable.-a E.g., I was doing 3D
CAD (under a DOS extender) back in ~1990; schematic capture in the
early 80's, PCB layout in the same timeframe, etc.

Parts/inventory management is in the cloud, email is in the cloud,
accounting is in the cloud, document editing is in the could (though I
use R Studio and LibreOFfice sometimes, but MS is not necessary),
Github is in the cloud, VS Code is _basically_ in the cloud. With
regular multipoint local backups of all the important stuff of course.

I don't let anything outside of my direct physical control.
I don't want to have to rely on connectivity for anything but
those things that require it (email/WWW).-a Its easier for me to
just set up a server to address a specific need (e.g., my
repository lets me archive ANY binary, not just my own sources;
similarly for VMs, etc.)

There's just WAY too much content to be moving copies of it
into/out of the house!

Oh, I use Mathematica sometimes on Windows, though it's not really
necessary.

This is probably my last Windows laptop, I'm only still using it
because it's a pain to get a new laptop and transfer everything all
over and I'm kinda busy lately.

I only use a laptop when traveling (something I have been trying to
avoid, as I get older).-a There, an email and http client -- plus a
copy of FrameMaker (as I am *always* busy preparing documents and
it is a relatively portable task)

I have a 16 y/o iMac in the "technology museum" which is still
surprisingly usable, running Snow Leopard or Lion or something, though
I don't think I'd want to connect it to the Internet.

My oldest "PC" is a Compaq Portable 386, kept for the ISA card
support it provides me.-a I keep a Sun Voyager and SB2000 for
access to SPARC hardware (and the tools that let me verify
my code on it).

I have a LOT of tools. I've made an effort to keep everything that
I've accumulated, over the years, operational.-a (This because I could,
in theory, be tasked with supporting a past project at any time.)

There should be a LTS fee for dinosaur storage, lots of technology is
best left in the past.

[I have a similar "hoarder" attitude with hand tools; if I *once*
had a need for it, then its likely that I may need it again!-a So,
find a place to store it until that day comes.]

It's annoying not having a particular tool when you need it, but gosh
ISA is long ago.

Many of them are Windows based.-a Some SOLARIS, some BSD, etc.-a All
of my UN*X boxen run headless; they are accessed via RDP, VNC or
X servers running on the Windows machines.-a This so I can blend
the use of each type of tool at a single display station.-a E.g.,
cut and paste snippets of code developed on a UN*X box into a
document I am preparing under Windows.

They are grouped into 4 broad categories:
- Document preparation
- CAD/EDA
- Software Design
- Multimedia authoring
each served by a different (identical) machine.

Of my "work" time, about 40-60% is spent doing document prep.
Generating text, illustrations, charts, etc.-a Recording results
of tests, etc.-a This usually calls on tools from each of the other
groups (e.g., pasting a portion of a schematic or layout into a
document; creating an animation to illustrate some process or
concept; preparing audio snippets where prose would not be an
effective way of describing what something sounds like, etc.)

I *live* in FrameMaker and rely heavily on the Adobe suite for
photo editing, illustration, etc.-a Other tools to let me create
typefaces ("fonts") for documents that don't rely solely on ASCII
glyphs (e.g., my speech synthesizer required a commingling of IPA
and dingbat symbols along with regular text).-a I keep all of the
typefaces I've acquired over the years -- a few hundred MB -- "on
line" as browsing OFF-LINE typefaces is a colossally impractical
waste of time:-a much easier to just LOOK at them "live".-a Ditto
clipart.

The same applies to EDA/CAD with the various symbol and footprint
libraries, datasheets/manuals, 3D models, etc.-a I've tried to
make EVERYTHING accessible just by opening a network connection
(NFS, SMB, etc.) instead of digging through physical media.

[In the past, I maintained ONE machine with removable disk
drives that I would plug, as needed, and store "cold".-a Now,
even that is tedious so I just add spindles to machines rescued
solely for the convenience of accessing them at will (I have
well over 100 spindles that I could spin up, at the same time,
if the house's electrical and cooling system could handle the
load!)]

I use Windows-based GUI tools to maintain my [sic] "databases"
(which are hosted on BSD boxen).-a Data entry is just so much more
convenient in that environment.-a And, ERDs are so much simpler to
create in a WYSIWYG environment.-a Ditto MathCAD, MatLAB, Mathematica, Octave, etc.

I have scores of Windows/DOS-hosted asssemblers/compilers/debuggers
for the various processors I've used or evaluated for projects, over
the years.-a Ditto, source libraries.-a But, do most of my 9-to-5
software development under NetBSD with some special validation tools
(e.g., certified compilers, symbolic execution, analysis tools)
hosted under FreeBSD as it's "cheaper" to run a different OS than
it would be to port those toold over to NetBSD.-a And, periodic
jaunts over to Slowaris /et ilk/ to make sure my code isn't relying
on aspects of one particular hardware architecture -- in case I
decide to deploy on different hardware)

My VCSs run on separate servers with Windows and UN*X clients
so I can check in/out from whichever environment is most
convenient.-a Note that I can "afford" to use lower performing
"servers" as there's only *one* human client!

[I actually have development tools installed on my router so
I can access them without having to bring a bigger machine
on-line.-a As *it* runs 24/7/365, its a great place to do things
like "make world" without having to leave another box running
for just that purpose!]

I build animations and videos to illustrate certain issues in
a more intuitive manner (e.g., how the geometry of your vocal
tract changes when you make certain utterances or how a process
is migrated from one host to another, while running) where prose
and static illustrations are inadequate.-a If the goal is to
ensure the reader understands the material, then find the most
intuitive way to convey it!

[PDFs have hidden value in that you can embed audio, video
and "supplemental payloads" in them making them a versatile
"container format"]

I have a "digital audio synthesizer" in my current project that I
can profile with certain windows tools to verify I've configured
the synthesizer in a particular way.

I even have production video capabilities (e.g., television studio
kit) so I can do things like superimpose one live video stream onto
another, in real time, and add computer graphics to the mix (though
I recently retired the video cameras as they were very large in their shipping/travel cases -- about twice the size of a little "dorm" refrigerator!)

OSBot makes some great compact cameras that do a lot of pan/zoom/track
editing automatically with neural networks:

<https://www.obsbot.com/store/products/obsbot-tail-2?product_id=e903599a099e4>

Most of my networking tools are NetBSD hosted - though I have a couple
that are Windows related (i.e., know all about Windows specifics)
that run on Windows hosts.

I.e., it would be *beyond* PAINFULLY expensive to move all of these
tools to another (Windows) OS -- esp when that move doesn't BUY me
anything (and likely will cause some tools to stop working and others
to require relicensing).-a I still lament the loss of After Dark
(but don't have the time to develop a shim for it)!-a :<

Just the idea of having to feed (literally) hundreds of CDs/DVDs
of fonts, clipart, 3D models, libraries, etc. into another machine
(having already done so) to "install" them is daunting.-a (though
I have been copying *ISOs* of those media to a server to make
such a task a bit easier to script)

Can't you just emulate a lot of that old hardware if someone wants an
update after 30 years, or whatever? Or not even necessarily emulate,
many old x86 OSes like Windows 98 etc. run fine on a Ryzen with some CPU
flag patches.

I don't know about ISA support for modern motherboards but this PCIe to
PCI adapter card works fine with every legacy card I've tried:

<https://www.amazon.com/StarTech-com-PCI-Express-Adapter-Card/dp/B0024CV3SA/>

Some folks really like IT management and mucking around with PCs and
servers and stuff, I guess some get off on the feeling of power of bend
some piece of junk to their will by learning all its cryptic commands
inside and out.

Never got big into it, always seemed like the opposite of creativity to
me. Aside from a NAS/backup server I have three work PCs these days
which feels like two too many from a support/clutter point of view. I
hate being a digital janitor.


--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: sci.electronics.design

On 6/12/2026 10:36 PM, bitrex wrote:

I have a LOT of tools. I've made an effort to keep everything that
I've accumulated, over the years, operational.-a (This because I could,
in theory, be tasked with supporting a past project at any time.)

There should be a LTS fee for dinosaur storage, lots of technology is best left
in the past.

Note that it wasn't "the past" when I was using it. And, the
cost of recreating a toolchain (configured in exactly the
way it was when you developed a product) is outrageous.
Vendors have no real need to preserve older versions of their
products so trying to locate a compiler version from a year
ago may require cajoling a principal at the compiler vendor
and HOPING he is understanding. Much easier to just KEEP
it, *as* you had it installed, along with every other
tool that you used for that project.

I didn't think the "lifetime bug fixes" notion through,
completely. I hadn't realized how many projects would follow.
Nor had I thought about the fact that each would likely use
different tools -- and different configurations, etc.

Once I realized this, I started developing ways to preserve
entire environments (which is primarily the disk image).

I tried dumping disk images onto 9-track tape and keeping
10" reels "cold" for those times when I needed to copy them
*back* onto their disks.

I tried installing multiple disks in a big tower and
switching power to them so only the drive that I was
interested in would respond.

I tried moving the disks out of the machine onto a
SCSI bus (which, if quiescent, you can effectively
hotplug and then rescan).

I tried big disk arrays (up to 48 disks at a time).

I tried using DLTs to store disks in a smaller space
(than a physical disk required)

I finally settled on VMs. And, having the "original"
disks available meant I just had to repackage the physical
media into virtual media and find media on which to store it.
As modern disks are so much larger, you can store multiple
"original" disks on far fewer physical disks in their
virtualized forms.

[This also lets me *play* with an old environment without
altering it in the process -- just copy the VMDK and
play in that "new" image!]

Of course, each successive project had me working in a
"flusher" environment with more accumulated tools. So,
each successive VM got bigger (it wasn't practical to
figure out which *parts* of the environment were important
to preserve as a failure to preserve some component that
you had relied upon but didn't recollect could screw
you, down the road)

[When I stopped taking on new work, I built my current
*set* of workstations and, as physical disks are so much
larger, now, I opted to install all of the libraries that
I had previously kept offline (on CD/DVD media). As a
result, capturing my current work environment is no
longer practical -- four 7T machines, even if much of that
could be recreated from those same optical media :< ]

But, that still leaves you reliant on other aspects of the
machine's hardware. E.g., if an ICE requires a parallel
port to communicate with the debugger running on the
PC (before USB came along, serial was too slow for such
interfaces). So, now you need a "genuine" LPT port
(as the printer interface hadn't been virtualized, the
debuggers would often talk to specific I/O ports
expecting a traditional LPT port to reside there.)
My Unisite requires 3.5" floppies and a way to duplicate
them as well as move files on/off, easily. (I keep a
laptop with floppy drive for this purpose)

Hardware (peripherals) evolution is just a nuisance.

There is value (to clients) in someone ELSE maintaining
this legacy development environment. (I can recall a
client trying to make a modification to a board I'd
laid out in OrCAD 7 only to discover that their OrCAD *9*
wouldn't read the files! "Ah, but Don can do this!")

[One client kept a design in production for *30* years! I
have no idea how he found parts as I suspect many of them were
no longer available from distis in their original packages!]

[I have a similar "hoarder" attitude with hand tools; if I *once*
had a need for it, then its likely that I may need it again!-a So,
find a place to store it until that day comes.]

It's annoying not having a particular tool when you need it, but gosh ISA is long ago.

It's primary support, for me, is the Opus PMs. This gives
me access to GENIX, those compilers and some EDA tools that
were hosted under GNX.

[There are no x86/x64 ports of those tools available. Likewise
with the Slowaris stuff. SPARCs are radically different from
Intel.]

I even have production video capabilities (e.g., television studio
kit) so I can do things like superimpose one live video stream onto
another, in real time, and add computer graphics to the mix (though
I recently retired the video cameras as they were very large in their
shipping/travel cases -- about twice the size of a little "dorm"
refrigerator!)

OSBot makes some great compact cameras that do a lot of pan/zoom/track editing
automatically with neural networks:

<https://www.obsbot.com/store/products/obsbot-tail-2?product_id=e903599a099e4>

Nowadays, CPUs (and GPUs) are fast enough that one can do the
sort of things that I was doing with LIVE video (and special
hardware) in post. E.g., thre's enough horsepower available
that a machine could do the chromakey processing to isolate
key parts of one video stream and mix it on top of another.

Most of my networking tools are NetBSD hosted - though I have a couple
that are Windows related (i.e., know all about Windows specifics)
that run on Windows hosts.

I.e., it would be *beyond* PAINFULLY expensive to move all of these
tools to another (Windows) OS -- esp when that move doesn't BUY me
anything (and likely will cause some tools to stop working and others
to require relicensing).-a I still lament the loss of After Dark
(but don't have the time to develop a shim for it)!-a :<

Just the idea of having to feed (literally) hundreds of CDs/DVDs
of fonts, clipart, 3D models, libraries, etc. into another machine
(having already done so) to "install" them is daunting.-a (though
I have been copying *ISOs* of those media to a server to make
such a task a bit easier to script)

Can't you just emulate a lot of that old hardware if someone wants an update after 30 years, or whatever? Or not even necessarily emulate, many old x86 OSes
like Windows 98 etc. run fine on a Ryzen with some CPU flag patches.

They run fine in VMs. And, a VM just takes disk space (which
I have in abundance).

The catch is any specific hardware that is required in addition
to the software (stored in the VM). E.g., I have film scanners,
slide scanners, B-size scanners and even a *40* inch scanner
that can process *K* size drawings. But, the software almost
certainly doesn't run under Windows 11, 10, 8, 7, etc. So,
you need the OS and not just the application, then any other hardware.

I don't know about ISA support for modern motherboards but this PCIe to PCI adapter card works fine with every legacy card I've tried:

<https://www.amazon.com/StarTech-com-PCI-Express-Adapter-Card/dp/B0024CV3SA/>

Some folks really like IT management and mucking around with PCs and servers and stuff, I guess some get off on the feeling of power of bend some piece of
junk to their will by learning all its cryptic commands inside and out.

I don't want to invest any more time than I had to, originally. Making
an image (any of the ways I had attempted) is relatively low effort.

But, I want the tools that I *had* used to work as they did, originally.
I don't want to have to learn how to use some other tool to perform
a task that I was able to do, previously. Or remember some "trick"
I had to use to get applications to cooperate with each other.

I just want to wait while a VMDK is created from a physical disk, move
that onto a file server and forget about it.

Never got big into it, always seemed like the opposite of creativity to me. Aside from a NAS/backup server I have three work PCs these days which feels like two too many from a support/clutter point of view. I hate being a digital
janitor.

"Digital janitor" is a good term for it. I'd rather keep things "clean"
than let them deteriorate to a point where recovery becomes a real task.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: sci.electronics.design

On 6/13/2026 3:39 AM, Don Y wrote:

On 6/12/2026 10:36 PM, bitrex wrote:

I have a LOT of tools. I've made an effort to keep everything that
I've accumulated, over the years, operational.-a (This because I could,
in theory, be tasked with supporting a past project at any time.)

There should be a LTS fee for dinosaur storage, lots of technology is
best left in the past.

Note that it wasn't "the past" when I was using it.-a And, the
cost of recreating a toolchain (configured in exactly the
way it was when you developed a product) is outrageous.
Vendors have no real need to preserve older versions of their
products so trying to locate a compiler version from a year
ago may require cajoling a principal at the compiler vendor
and HOPING he is understanding.-a Much easier to just KEEP
it, *as* you had it installed, along with every other
tool that you used for that project.

I didn't think the "lifetime bug fixes" notion through,
completely.-a I hadn't realized how many projects would follow.
Nor had I thought about the fact that each would likely use
different tools -- and different configurations, etc.

Once I realized this, I started developing ways to preserve
entire environments (which is primarily the disk image).

Back-end development eventually also largely went to interpreted and JIT-compiled languages I think in large part for this reason, recreating
tool chains sucks.

My impression is embedded developers still struggle more with this,
because while I've thankfully not experienced the problem myself, cross-compilation is still not a perfect science and I've heard of cases
where strange results occur compiling the same code for the same target
with the same compiler version but on different platforms like e.g.
Linux vs. Mac.

But, that still leaves you reliant on other aspects of the
machine's hardware.-a E.g., if an ICE requires a parallel
port to communicate with the debugger running on the
PC (before USB came along, serial was too slow for such
interfaces).-a So, now you need a "genuine" LPT port
(as the printer interface hadn't been virtualized, the
debuggers would often talk to specific I/O ports
expecting a traditional LPT port to reside there.)
My Unisite requires 3.5" floppies and a way to duplicate
them as well as move files on/off, easily.-a (I keep a
laptop with floppy drive for this purpose)

For either 8 bit or 32 bit development I use a constrained but modern
dialect of C++ and most stuff can be mocked up on a desktop platform
where it's easier to debug.

For 32 bit platforms there's JTT and for in-circuit debugging on 8 bit
my favorite tool is still the serial port.

This all seems fairly platform-independent for the foreseeable future.


--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: sci.electronics.design

I didn't think the "lifetime bug fixes" notion through,
completely.-a I hadn't realized how many projects would follow.
Nor had I thought about the fact that each would likely use
different tools -- and different configurations, etc.

Once I realized this, I started developing ways to preserve
entire environments (which is primarily the disk image).

Back-end development eventually also largely went to interpreted and JIT- compiled languages I think in large part for this reason, recreating tool chains sucks.

Ages ago, CPUs (rarely MCUs) were sorely resource constrained. My first product had 12KB of TEXT and 128 bytes of RAM. Not much room for anything beyond the working code.

[My current project is the first time I've had *oodles* of resources to
"waste" as I see fit]

Even compiled languages produced relatively bland code -- folks are
spoiled by modern optimizers; old toolchains would create binaries
that one could 'decompile' in their predictability!

[A vendor wouldn't deliver the sources for their libraries. I was convinced there was a bug in one function. So, I "decompiled" the binary to C and annotated it with my patch to the bug I'd found. Gets you a lot more
"cred" than simply complaining that something doesn't work!]

My impression is embedded developers still struggle more with this, because while I've thankfully not experienced the problem myself, cross-compilation is
still not a perfect science and I've heard of cases where strange results occur
compiling the same code for the same target with the same compiler version but
on different platforms like e.g. Linux vs. Mac.

30-40 years ago, DOS was the hosting OS for most such tools. There
was always a risk that an "update" could break something or change
the code generator in ways that you hadn't expected. But, it was a
single vendor that you interacted with. And, if you kept engaged
with the vendor (staff), you could usually get "personalized service"

[I used to upload code samples -- the BBS era! -- and download new
versions of the tools a day or two later. KNOWING that the
changes were only related to the samples I had submitted (not the
wholesale rewrites that are common nowadays: "This USED to work but
the update broke it!"]

But, you typically couldn't change to a different toolchain (same
target) as many of the "undefined behaviors" and "implementation
specific" aspects weren't portable. E.g., there was no ".asm"
so all helper functions and hardware interfaces had to be created
in whatever form the vendor supported. Likely not the same as
some OTHER vendor.

If, for example, you had written a multitasking executive that needed
to access the internals of the CPU/etc., this would typically require
a considerable rewrite if you moved to another toolchain.

Or, pulling characters out of a UART.

Or, interfacing to bank-switching hardware.

But, that still leaves you reliant on other aspects of the
machine's hardware.-a E.g., if an ICE requires a parallel
port to communicate with the debugger running on the
PC (before USB came along, serial was too slow for such
interfaces).-a So, now you need a "genuine" LPT port
(as the printer interface hadn't been virtualized, the
debuggers would often talk to specific I/O ports
expecting a traditional LPT port to reside there.)
My Unisite requires 3.5" floppies and a way to duplicate
them as well as move files on/off, easily.-a (I keep a
laptop with floppy drive for this purpose)

For either 8 bit or 32 bit development I use a constrained but modern dialect
of C++ and most stuff can be mocked up on a desktop platform where it's easier
to debug.

This, IMO, is essential. Sadly, many developers feel uncomfortable
without target hardware available -- even though most of their code
doesn't interact with that hardware beyond instruction fetches, etc.

This makes it considerably easier to instrument the code and
build test scaffolding to "prove" its functionality. Otherwise,
you need hardware probes to extract "results" from a target. Doing
this on a development host gives your tools access to anything you
can imagine (albeit not in real-time -- which is often preferable
as it gives your meatware time to understand what is ACTUALLY
happening AS it happens).

[This doesn't really help with debugging hardware-related issues
but that's usually a small portion of the codebase -- esp if you
design with a layered approach]

Legacy processors didn't have internal support for debugging.
The serial port was external to the processor so relied on
more than just the CPU being operational (addr/data busses,
decoder, control logic, memory, UART, etc.). Bringing up new
hardware meant you couldn't count on ANYTHING to work.

But, the ICE would let you execute code out of *its* RAM (which
means you can patch that code without having to rebuild the entire
binary), set breakpoints using *its* breakpoint logic, capture
execution traces using *its* capture buffer, etc.

And, interact reliably with the debugger running on/in the *host*
regardless of how confused the CPU/target happened to be.

[E.g., an 8085 will halt at address 0x76 if memory is inaccessible...
because the lower 8b of the address are multiplexed onto the
databus, it will effectively fetch a 0x00 opcode (NOP) from address
0x0000; a 0x01 opcode (LXI B) from address 0x0001 -- which will then
pull in a 16b argument of 0x02, 0x03 from the two following addresses;
etc. until fetching a 0x76 opcode (HLT) from address 0x0076]

Imagine trying to bring up an MMU when you can't be assured
the address and data busses (and decoder) are even operational,
let alone your "programming" of the TLBs, etc.!

But, ICEs are expensive -- the least costly one I recall at about $1K
1980 dollars (on top of the ~$2K for the toolchain) with others in
excess of $25K (again, 1980/1990 dollars).

Supporting multiple processors (as a client may have a preference)
gets expensive pretty quick! CPU manufacturers typically didn't
provide tools as willingly they do now.

Early in my career, I would design such capabilities as add-on
tools for specific processors (the design needing to be tweaked
for the peculiarities of each processor). As you were only paying
for components (not someone else's markup/profit), you could afford
to get extravagant with the features you'd implement. So, instead
of a single breakpoint with limited constraints (addr range, data
range, bus cycle type, etc.) you could have multiple breakpoints,
arrange for them to be enabled sequentially (wait for THIS, then
watch for THAT, then break on WHATEVER).

[Hint: using bipolar RAMs instead of comparators is a huge
win as you can treat them as logic arrays to create whatever
conditions you want -- "break on write to address divisible
by 3 in this range", etc.]

There was considerable debate as to whether an ICE or logic analyzer
was the tool-of-choice. The fact that an ICE would let you exercise
the hardware despite its operational state was the clincher, IMO.

I could monitor memory locations in real time (by integrating the
in-target debugger code with your MTOS to interact with a HARDWARE display/keypad) and get "inside" the product. And, could design
the hardware so this capability remained present in production
code -- by having the code dynamically probe for the debug hardware
and link in the debug *software* located on it. This is a great
win when you are deploying first articles and wondering why things
aren't working!

For 32 bit platforms there's JTT and for in-circuit debugging on 8 bit my favorite tool is still the serial port.

Yes, but this assumes the processor -- and code/hardware within
it -- are operational. And, that you can devote those resources to that function, "hereafter". An ICE doesn't *rely* on your hardware at all
but just interfaces to it.

This all seems fairly platform-independent for the foreseeable future.

The serial port may be deprecated in favor of USB I/O. And, as more
migrates into MCUs, getting access to that internal state (e.g., tracing execution or profiling it) becomes more problematic.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: sci.electronics.design

On 6/10/2026 2:19 PM, Don Y wrote:

However, I am not sure SWMBO would find that to be the case.
Meanwhile, I'll build a FBSD box and see how she takes to the idea. (thankfully, building that box means I can just pull the drive to
move it to a nicer platform -- unlike MS's braindead approach where
you have to rebuild each new instance!)

Well, it has been *way* easier for me! And, she's managing
to adapt -- tbird and ffox being the primary apps so she's
not required to learn much.

[She was amazed at how much "snappier" the machine is
without MS dragging it down...]

Not being able to multiplex the UI is a bit of a problem
but I can just set up a second machine and use each of them
as "single accounts" instead of sorting out that issue.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: sci.electronics.design

Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> wrote: |------------------------------------------------------|
|"[She was amazed at how much "snappier" the machine is|
|without MS dragging it down...]" | |------------------------------------------------------|

SPEC insists on Windows but
"June 20, 2017: Due to a known issue in Microsoft Windows Server 2016
memory management, the SERT-< suite will not be supported on that
operating system until a fix is made available.

June 20, 2017: SPEC cannot provide support on the SPECpower_ssj-< 2008 benchmark for test failures using Microsoft Windows Server 2016 due to
an issue with large pages and memory management in the operating
system. Please contact Microsoft technical support for assistance.
Completed runs on Windows Server 2016 will be processed for review as
usual."
says
HTTPS://SPEC.org/notes/newsarchived

(S. HTTP://Gloucester.Insomnia247.NL/ fuer Kontaktdaten!)
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: sci.electronics.design

On 6/21/2026 11:26 AM, Niocl|is P||l Caile|in de Ghloucester wrote:

Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> wrote: |------------------------------------------------------|
|"[She was amazed at how much "snappier" the machine is|
|without MS dragging it down...]" | |------------------------------------------------------|

SPEC insists on Windows but
"June 20, 2017: Due to a known issue in Microsoft Windows Server 2016
memory management, the SERT-< suite will not be supported on that
operating system until a fix is made available.

June 20, 2017: SPEC cannot provide support on the SPECpower_ssj-< 2008 benchmark for test failures using Microsoft Windows Server 2016 due to
an issue with large pages and memory management in the operating
system. Please contact Microsoft technical support for assistance.
Completed runs on Windows Server 2016 will be processed for review as
usual."

In some sense, you've gotta feel sorry for MS as they are stuck
supporting all this legacy stuff (even though it's THEIR legacy!).
Ditto POSIX and all the other implementations that cling to
the past (despite the fact that people aren't always using them
to support EXISTING codebases but, rather, NEW designs!)

"Starting from scratch" lets you come up with cleaner and more robust
designs and implementations instead of yet-another-bolt-on set
of features (with their hidden assumptions and latent bugs)

Even if you assume only *1* defect per KSLOC, it's not hard
to envision (tens of?) thousands of bugs just waiting to surface
in some of these "products of evolution".
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: sci.electronics.design

On Sun, 21 Jun 2026 12:33:04 -0700, Don Y
<blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> wrote:

In some sense, you've gotta feel sorry for MS as they are stuck
supporting all this legacy stuff (even though it's THEIR legacy!).
Ditto POSIX and all the other implementations that cling to
the past (despite the fact that people aren't always using them
to support EXISTING codebases but, rather, NEW designs!)

I do not consider COBOL 2023 to be clinging to the past.

COBOL has often been decreed a dead language by pundits and the media.
However, I find only a few vague hints that COBOL might be in danger
of dying or being replaced:
<https://cobolcowboys.com/cobol-today/>
"COBOL is 65% of active code used today; and runs 85% of all business transactions."
"Sheer cost and effort to replace COBOL is not an acceptable return on investment."
"Critical COBOL systems are still driving a large number of
prestigious companies."

From a recruiting site: <https://www.ziprecruiter.com/e/Cobol-Will-AI-replace-COBOL>
"COBOL developers are unlikely to be fully replaced by AI in the near
term, as many legacy systems still rely on COBOL for critical
financial and government applications."

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COBOL>
"As of 2020, COBOL ran background processes 95% of the time a credit
or debit card was swiped."

The current version is COBOL 2023, which includes updates and
improvements. <https://www.incits.org/news-events/news-coverage/available-now-2023-edition-of-isoiec-1989-cobol>

One can also run COBOL programs on Linux: <https://www.ibm.com/products/cobol-compiler-linux-x86> <https://gnucobol.sourceforge.io/> (released July 28, 2023) <https://platform.softwareone.com/product/ibm-cobol-for-linux-on-x86/PCP-0996-7216>

or on the cloud: <https://www.forbes.com/sites/tomgroenfeldt/2022/05/18/covid-accelerates-banks-mainframe-migration-to-cloud/>
"The survey found that 77% expect to recover their mainframe migration investment within 18 months. The legacy code base still serves the
banks in a good way, he added, since deposit accounts havenAt changed
that much in 10 years."
--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
PO Box 272 http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Ben Lomond CA 95005-0272 AE6KS 831-336-2558

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: sci.electronics.design

On 6/21/2026 7:47 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:

On Sun, 21 Jun 2026 12:33:04 -0700, Don Y
<blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> wrote:

In some sense, you've gotta feel sorry for MS as they are stuck
supporting all this legacy stuff (even though it's THEIR legacy!).
Ditto POSIX and all the other implementations that cling to
the past (despite the fact that people aren't always using them
to support EXISTING codebases but, rather, NEW designs!)

I do not consider COBOL 2023 to be clinging to the past.

I don't see websites written in COBOL. Nor credit card
terminals. Each present in "business transactions".

COBOL has often been decreed a dead language by pundits and the media. However, I find only a few vague hints that COBOL might be in danger
of dying or being replaced:
<https://cobolcowboys.com/cobol-today/>
"COBOL is 65% of active code used today; and runs 85% of all business transactions."
"Sheer cost and effort to replace COBOL is not an acceptable return on investment."
"Critical COBOL systems are still driving a large number of
prestigious companies."

From a recruiting site: <https://www.ziprecruiter.com/e/Cobol-Will-AI-replace-COBOL>
"COBOL developers are unlikely to be fully replaced by AI in the near
term, as many legacy systems still rely on COBOL for critical
financial and government applications."

Nor are BASIC programmers likely "to be fully replaced by AI
in the near future".

But, folks developing new systems think long and hard about
how those will be supported in the future. You're likely
to see COBOL-to-<whatever> converters nibbling away at
existing codebases as *real* COBOL developers are hard to
come by (not the job listing I posted a few days back for
someone to maintain a COBOL codebase for the SSA).

Adam by all measures, is a much more efficient development
"medium" than C yet you don't find many Ada developers
or C/C++ developers rushing to embrace it -- despite it being
a 50 year old language.

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COBOL>
"As of 2020, COBOL ran background processes 95% of the time a credit
or debit card was swiped."

And the foreground was some "cash register" or "credit card reader"
almost certainly NOT running COBOL.

The current version is COBOL 2023, which includes updates and
improvements. <https://www.incits.org/news-events/news-coverage/available-now-2023-edition-of-isoiec-1989-cobol>

One can also run COBOL programs on Linux: <https://www.ibm.com/products/cobol-compiler-linux-x86> <https://gnucobol.sourceforge.io/> (released July 28, 2023) <https://platform.softwareone.com/product/ibm-cobol-for-linux-on-x86/PCP-0996-7216>

or on the cloud: <https://www.forbes.com/sites/tomgroenfeldt/2022/05/18/covid-accelerates-banks-mainframe-migration-to-cloud/>
"The survey found that 77% expect to recover their mainframe migration investment within 18 months. The legacy code base still serves the
banks in a good way, he added, since deposit accounts havenrCOt changed
that much in 10 years."

Exactly. There's no DEMAND for new approaches; accounting is
still accounting. And, security is likely enforced at the edge
with the business software not directly exposed to adversaries.

You're not going to build a surveillance camera using such outdated
technology. Or, a navigation system. Or, the AIs in a self-driving
car.

Imagine how much code runs in mice and keyboards. And, disk
controllers. NIC slushware. All things that run on/in every desktop
machine, even if it never "does any business". What a huge market
COBOL is missing out on, eh? <grin>

The bigger evolutionary problem is for (increasingly interconnected)
"devices" that "run the world" without any reliance on business software.
Does the traffic light controller need to perform any business/financial transactions? Or, the smart cameras that adjust its scheduling to
adapt to the presence of local patrols? Thermostats, nannycams,
garage door openers, VFDs, TVs/DVRs, cellphones, appliances that
increasingly rely on electronics to replace old "mechanisms", etc.

These are the places where legacy ideas have opportunities to
avoid the models that have led to buggy implementations. But,
developers are loathe to think in new ways (even if those "new
ways" are actually decades old!)

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: sci.electronics.design

On 6/21/2026 9:04 PM, Don Y wrote:

The bigger evolutionary problem is for (increasingly interconnected) "devices" that "run the world" without any reliance on business software. Does the traffic light controller need to perform any business/financial transactions?-a Or, the smart cameras that adjust its scheduling to
adapt to the presence of local patrols?-a Thermostats, nannycams,

s/patrol/platoon/

Other typos can likely be resolved by context.

garage door openers, VFDs, TVs/DVRs, cellphones, appliances that
increasingly rely on electronics to replace old "mechanisms", etc.

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: sci.electronics.design

Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> wrote:

[...]

I don't see websites written in COBOL.

How can you tell?

They appear to interface with the browser in HTML but the underlying
code that generates the HTML could be PHP, Basic, Algol, COBOL or almost anything.
--
~ Liz Tuddenham ~
(Remove the ".invalid"s and add ".co.uk" to reply)
www.poppyrecords.co.uk
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: sci.electronics.design

On 6/22/2026 4:37 AM, Liz Tuddenham wrote:

Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> wrote:

[...]

I don't see websites written in COBOL.

How can you tell?

They appear to interface with the browser in HTML but the underlying
code that generates the HTML could be PHP, Basic, Algol, COBOL or almost anything.

If that were the case (a HUGE "if"), then it would still mean there is
roughly the same amount of code being written in HTML/JS as COBOL.

The fact that you don't see much demand for COBOL programmers suggests it
is an obsolescent language.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: sci.electronics.design

On Mon, 22 Jun 2026 05:30:35 -0700, Don Y
<blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> wrote:

On 6/22/2026 4:37 AM, Liz Tuddenham wrote:

Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> wrote:

[...]

I don't see websites written in COBOL.

COBOL is usually written using a text editor or on a data terminal.
Which editor or terminal was used to write the program is rarely
displayed.

Hint:
HTML is a markup language while COBOL is a programming language. There
is a difference.

How about COBOL inside HTML?
<https://github.com/juan9889/HtmlCobol>

"Writing Web Apps in COBOL" <https://medium.com/@karboncodes/writing-web-apps-in-cobol-a18f74dc44f5> <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xJF4fw4rY_0> (33:18)

How can you tell?

They appear to interface with the browser in HTML but the underlying
code that generates the HTML could be PHP, Basic, Algol, COBOL or almost
anything.

If that were the case (a HUGE "if"), then it would still mean there is >roughly the same amount of code being written in HTML/JS as COBOL.

The fact that you don't see much demand for COBOL programmers suggests it
is an obsolescent language.

There are still schools, universities and online course that teach
COBOL. A sample:
<https://cobolacademy.com> <https://developer.ibm.com/series/open-mainframe-project-cobol-programming-course-webinar-series/>
<https://www.franklin.edu/career-guide/computer-programmers/how-to-become-cobol-programmers>
etc...

The brother of a former friend and customer (both deceased) was
life-long COBOL programmer. His employers and customers were mostly government, insurance and financial institutions. I lost count of how
many times he retired and was then called back to write or fix COBOL
programs. You might be correct that there's not much demand for COBOL programmers. However, those that are working on COBOL programs don't
seem to starving.
--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
PO Box 272 http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Ben Lomond CA 95005-0272 AE6KS 831-336-2558

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: sci.electronics.design

Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> wrote: |-------------------------------------------------------|
|"On Sun, 21 Jun 2026 12:33:04 -0700, Don Y | |<blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> wrote: |
| |

In some sense, you've gotta feel sorry for MS [. . .] |

|[. . .] |

Ditto POSIX [. . .]" | |-------------------------------------------------------|

Eh no.

|-------------------------------------------------------|
|"[. . .] | |<https://www.ibm.com/products/cobol-compiler-linux-x86>|
|[. . .]" | |-------------------------------------------------------|

IBM decided to focus on Java so it sold off its Smalltalk and Ada
divisions.
(S. HTTP://Gloucester.Insomnia247.NL/ fuer Kontaktdaten!)
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: sci.electronics.design

On Mon, 22 Jun 2026 17:20:21 -0000 (UTC), Nioclbs P<l Cailebn de
Ghloucester <thanks-to@Taf.com> wrote:

Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> wrote: >|-------------------------------------------------------|
|"On Sun, 21 Jun 2026 12:33:04 -0700, Don Y | >|<blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> wrote: |
| |

In some sense, you've gotta feel sorry for MS [. . .] |

|[. . .] |

Ditto POSIX [. . .]" | >|-------------------------------------------------------|

Eh no.

|-------------------------------------------------------|
|"[. . .] | >|<https://www.ibm.com/products/cobol-compiler-linux-x86>|
|[. . .]" | >|-------------------------------------------------------|

IBM decided to focus on Java so it sold off its Smalltalk and Ada
divisions.
(S. HTTP://Gloucester.Insomnia247.NL/ fuer Kontaktdaten!)

I don't believe it was "sold off". IBM conglomerated Smalltalk and
other languages into a single IDE (integrated development environment)
called VisualAge:
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VisualAge#Early_history>
Included were:
"BASIC, COBOL, C, C++, EGL, Fortran, Java, Pacbase, PL/I, IBM RPG, and Smalltalk".

"VisualAge for Java is based on an extended Smalltalk virtual machine
which executes both Smalltalk and Java byte codes. Java natives were
actually implemented in Smalltalk."

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smalltalk#History>
VisualAge morphed into Eclipse Framework and possibly Web Sphere
Studio. Of course, the name continued to change:
"Cincom, GemTalk, and Instantiations, continue to sell Smalltalk
environments. IBM ended VisualAge Smalltalk, having in the late 1990s
decided to back Java instead and, as of 2005, is supported by
Instantiations, Inc.[19] Instantiations renamed the product VA
Smalltalk (VAST Platform) and continue to release new versions
yearly."

I don't know what happened to Ada.
--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
PO Box 272 http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Ben Lomond CA 95005-0272 AE6KS 831-336-2558

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: sci.electronics.design

On 6/22/2026 10:15 AM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:

On Mon, 22 Jun 2026 05:30:35 -0700, Don Y
<blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> wrote:

On 6/22/2026 4:37 AM, Liz Tuddenham wrote:

Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> wrote:

[...]

I don't see websites written in COBOL.

COBOL is usually written using a text editor or on a data terminal.
Which editor or terminal was used to write the program is rarely
displayed.

Editor used is not an issue. How was the HTML written, on a
chalkboard?

The HTML is served *to* the browser. There's no COBOL, there.

Hint:
HTML is a markup language while COBOL is a programming language. There
is a difference.

Both are LANGUAGES. Both are created by programmers (not poets
or english literature majors -- though both could likely be trained
to use one of the common frameworks/wizards). Both are Turing
complete (if you augment HTML with CSS or JS).

How about COBOL inside HTML?
<https://github.com/juan9889/HtmlCobol>

How about Inferno and run real distributed apps?
<https://code.google.com/archive/p/inferno-plugin/>

Or, run an app *in* your PS printer (PS being Turing complete)?

"Writing Web Apps in COBOL" <https://medium.com/@karboncodes/writing-web-apps-in-cobol-a18f74dc44f5> <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xJF4fw4rY_0> (33:18)

How can you tell?

They appear to interface with the browser in HTML but the underlying
code that generates the HTML could be PHP, Basic, Algol, COBOL or almost >>> anything.

If that were the case (a HUGE "if"), then it would still mean there is
roughly the same amount of code being written in HTML/JS as COBOL.

The fact that you don't see much demand for COBOL programmers suggests it
is an obsolescent language.

There are still schools, universities and online course that teach
COBOL. A sample:
<https://cobolacademy.com> <https://developer.ibm.com/series/open-mainframe-project-cobol-programming-course-webinar-series/>
<https://www.franklin.edu/career-guide/computer-programmers/how-to-become-cobol-programmers>
etc...

The brother of a former friend and customer (both deceased) was
life-long COBOL programmer. His employers and customers were mostly government, insurance and financial institutions. I lost count of how
many times he retired and was then called back to write or fix COBOL programs. You might be correct that there's not much demand for COBOL programmers. However, those that are working on COBOL programs don't
seem to starving.

I've repeatedly mentioned my colleague who rescues Sun big iron to
support his employer's enterprise. He's quite secure in hhis job as
few people have even the foggiest ideas of how to configure and
operate such kit -- or, an interest in doing so!

When a skill is scarce, it can command outsized pay. But, its very
scarcity marks it as a likely bad career path.

What do you think I'd charge to bail someone out of a bind with an
8x300 product? 2A03? 2650? Z280? 647180? Where the skillset is
just ONE aspect of "being relevant"; having the required tools being
just as important.

OTOH, what appeal supporting a product taht is (likely) representative
of a decades old design? I toured the Cheyenne Mountain Complex in ~1980.
At the time, they were having a "computer upgrade" installed -- that had
been ordered and specified in the 1960's. How exciting to be working
on the initial release of a 20 year-old design (not!)

OTOH, it's not worth advertising those capabilities as they are
rarer than hen's teeth.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: sci.electronics.design

On 6/22/2026 10:20 AM, Niocl|is P||l Caile|in de Ghloucester wrote:

Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> wrote: |-------------------------------------------------------|
|"On Sun, 21 Jun 2026 12:33:04 -0700, Don Y | |<blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> wrote: |
| |

In some sense, you've gotta feel sorry for MS [. . .] |

|[. . .] |

Ditto POSIX [. . .]" | |-------------------------------------------------------|

Eh no.

Would YOU like to be forever supporting decisions you'd made
10, 20, 40 years ago? Continually "evolving" a product
while constrained never to leave past applications (yours
as well as those of others) behind?

[I suspect there is a variant of the "horse designed by committee"
joke that accurately reflects the issues of "evolved" designs]

I've never reused code as clients like to think they paid for
a certain set of character strings. But, *design* reuse is
far more effective. Persistence of ideas (models) instead of
cut-and-paste of "code".

This gives me the ability to explore different design approaches
without burdening a new project with support for code developed
for an old one. Each OS can present a different API and different
notion of hardware abstractions that the "current project" can
explore to determine their efficacy -- cherry pick the ideas and
models that have the most value and leave the "mistakes" behind.

MS has to drag all of their dirty laundry forward with each successive
release lest they annoy some developer that can now no longer run
something he wrote "a few months ago" on a new platform.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: sci.electronics.design

Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> wrote:

[...]

How about COBOL inside HTML?

It is certainly possible (in fact not uncommon) to write PHP inside
HTML. I have done it and even used the PHP to write more HTML 'on the
fly'. I don't see why COBOL: shouuldn't be used in the same way.
--
~ Liz Tuddenham ~
(Remove the ".invalid"s and add ".co.uk" to reply)
www.poppyrecords.co.uk
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: sci.electronics.design

On Mon, 22 Jun 2026 12:29:02 -0700, Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com>
wrote:

On Mon, 22 Jun 2026 17:20:21 -0000 (UTC), Nioclbs P<l Cailebn de
Ghloucester <thanks-to@Taf.com> wrote:

Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> wrote: >>|-------------------------------------------------------|
|"On Sun, 21 Jun 2026 12:33:04 -0700, Don Y | >>|<blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> wrote: |
| |

In some sense, you've gotta feel sorry for MS [. . .] |

|[. . .] |

Ditto POSIX [. . .]" | >>|-------------------------------------------------------|

Eh no.

|-------------------------------------------------------|
|"[. . .] | >>|<https://www.ibm.com/products/cobol-compiler-linux-x86>|
|[. . .]" | >>|-------------------------------------------------------|

IBM decided to focus on Java so it sold off its Smalltalk and Ada >>divisions.
(S. HTTP://Gloucester.Insomnia247.NL/ fuer Kontaktdaten!)

I don't believe it was "sold off". IBM conglomerated Smalltalk and
other languages into a single IDE (integrated development environment)
called VisualAge:
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VisualAge#Early_history>
Included were:
"BASIC, COBOL, C, C++, EGL, Fortran, Java, Pacbase, PL/I, IBM RPG, and >Smalltalk".

"VisualAge for Java is based on an extended Smalltalk virtual machine
which executes both Smalltalk and Java byte codes. Java natives were
actually implemented in Smalltalk."

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smalltalk#History>
VisualAge morphed into Eclipse Framework and possibly Web Sphere
Studio. Of course, the name continued to change:
"Cincom, GemTalk, and Instantiations, continue to sell Smalltalk >environments. IBM ended VisualAge Smalltalk, having in the late 1990s
decided to back Java instead and, as of 2005, is supported by
Instantiations, Inc.[19] Instantiations renamed the product VA
Smalltalk (VAST Platform) and continue to release new versions
yearly."

I don't know what happened to Ada.

Lost out to C/C++ in the market.

Joe
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: sci.electronics.design

<joegwinn@comcast.net> wrote:

On Mon, 22 Jun 2026 12:29:02 -0700, Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com>
wrote:

On Mon, 22 Jun 2026 17:20:21 -0000 (UTC), Niocl|is P||l Caile|in de
Ghloucester <thanks-to@Taf.com> wrote:

Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> wrote:
|-------------------------------------------------------|
|"On Sun, 21 Jun 2026 12:33:04 -0700, Don Y |
|<blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> wrote: |
| |

In some sense, you've gotta feel sorry for MS [. . .] |

|[. . .] |

Ditto POSIX [. . .]" |

|-------------------------------------------------------|

Eh no.

|-------------------------------------------------------|
|"[. . .] |
|<https://www.ibm.com/products/cobol-compiler-linux-x86>|
|[. . .]" |
|-------------------------------------------------------|

IBM decided to focus on Java so it sold off its Smalltalk and Ada
divisions.
(S. HTTP://Gloucester.Insomnia247.NL/ fuer Kontaktdaten!)

I don't believe it was "sold off". IBM conglomerated Smalltalk and
other languages into a single IDE (integrated development environment)
called VisualAge:
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VisualAge#Early_history>
Included were:
"BASIC, COBOL, C, C++, EGL, Fortran, Java, Pacbase, PL/I, IBM RPG, and
Smalltalk".

"VisualAge for Java is based on an extended Smalltalk virtual machine
which executes both Smalltalk and Java byte codes. Java natives were
actually implemented in Smalltalk."

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smalltalk#History>
VisualAge morphed into Eclipse Framework and possibly Web Sphere
Studio. Of course, the name continued to change:
"Cincom, GemTalk, and Instantiations, continue to sell Smalltalk
environments. IBM ended VisualAge Smalltalk, having in the late 1990s
decided to back Java instead and, as of 2005, is supported by
Instantiations, Inc.[19] Instantiations renamed the product VA
Smalltalk (VAST Platform) and continue to release new versions
yearly."

I don't know what happened to Ada.

Lost out to C/C++ in the market.

Joe

It was mostly propped up by the DoDrCOs insistence on its use.

I was a great fan of VisualAge C++.
Version 3.08 had by far the best debugger IrCOve ever usedrCowhen one thread hit a breakpoint, all threads stopped right away.

That made multithread program development way easier.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs
--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs Principal Consultant ElectroOptical Innovations LLC / Hobbs ElectroOptics Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: sci.electronics.design

On 6/23/2026 8:55 AM, joegwinn@comcast.net wrote:

On Mon, 22 Jun 2026 23:22:57 -0000 (UTC), Phil Hobbs

I was a great fan of VisualAge C++.
Version 3.08 had by far the best debugger IrCOve ever usedrCowhen one thread >> hit a breakpoint, all threads stopped right away.

Did anyone else ever adopt that? I'm thinking it might be awkward to implement in an interrupt-driven threaded kernel.

That's how most ICEs work (of necessity). It was usually more
of a hindrance than a help as now the hardware is frozen in
a particular state and the machine has no way of ensuring
it returns to a safe/stable state while you're trying to
sort out what has happened. E.g., a mechanism is now in
motion without supervision.

My (run-time) debugger lets you decide whether the thread, process,
core or machine is "interrupted" by such conditions. You can
exploit this to ensure an independant thread/process/core can
continue to execute to bring the machine to a safe state (because
a thread/process/core could potentially "stop" during production
code and you'd still want the design to protect itself).

[Imagine when the thing that "stops" is on another node, elsewhere
in the network (e.g., a node crashing, network cable being opened,
etc.) You'd almost certainly want to ensure that this had minimal
impact on safety/security.]
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: sci.electronics.design

<joegwinn@comcast.net> wrote:

On Mon, 22 Jun 2026 23:22:57 -0000 (UTC), Phil Hobbs <pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:

<joegwinn@comcast.net> wrote:

On Mon, 22 Jun 2026 12:29:02 -0700, Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com>
wrote:

On Mon, 22 Jun 2026 17:20:21 -0000 (UTC), Niocl|is P||l Caile|in de
Ghloucester <thanks-to@Taf.com> wrote:

Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> wrote:
|-------------------------------------------------------|
|"On Sun, 21 Jun 2026 12:33:04 -0700, Don Y |
|<blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> wrote: |
| |

In some sense, you've gotta feel sorry for MS [. . .] |

|[. . .] |

Ditto POSIX [. . .]" |

|-------------------------------------------------------|

Eh no.

|-------------------------------------------------------|
|"[. . .] |
|<https://www.ibm.com/products/cobol-compiler-linux-x86>|
|[. . .]" |
|-------------------------------------------------------|

IBM decided to focus on Java so it sold off its Smalltalk and Ada
divisions.
(S. HTTP://Gloucester.Insomnia247.NL/ fuer Kontaktdaten!)

I don't believe it was "sold off". IBM conglomerated Smalltalk and
other languages into a single IDE (integrated development environment) >>>> called VisualAge:
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VisualAge#Early_history>
Included were:
"BASIC, COBOL, C, C++, EGL, Fortran, Java, Pacbase, PL/I, IBM RPG, and >>>> Smalltalk".

"VisualAge for Java is based on an extended Smalltalk virtual machine
which executes both Smalltalk and Java byte codes. Java natives were
actually implemented in Smalltalk."

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smalltalk#History>
VisualAge morphed into Eclipse Framework and possibly Web Sphere
Studio. Of course, the name continued to change:
"Cincom, GemTalk, and Instantiations, continue to sell Smalltalk
environments. IBM ended VisualAge Smalltalk, having in the late 1990s
decided to back Java instead and, as of 2005, is supported by
Instantiations, Inc.[19] Instantiations renamed the product VA
Smalltalk (VAST Platform) and continue to release new versions
yearly."

I don't know what happened to Ada.

Lost out to C/C++ in the market.

Joe

It was mostly propped up by the DoD-As insistence on its use.

Yes, although the top-down crowd was all in because Ada promised to
force programmers to be better by tying their wrists to their ankles.

I was a great fan of VisualAge C++.
Version 3.08 had by far the best debugger I-Ave ever used-uwhen one thread >> hit a breakpoint, all threads stopped right away.

Did anyone else ever adopt that? I'm thinking it might be awkward to implement in an interrupt-driven threaded kernel.

Dunno. AFAIR it worked fine with SMP kernels in OS/2. Around 2005 I moved
to XP and Linux on a homemade cluster (seven dual-processor pizza boxes).

I quite liked the Intel C++ compiler at the timerCoit outperformed MS on vectorized FP code by about a factor of 2, and both left that erarCOs GCC in the dust.

That made multithread program development way easier.

Too bad it never escaped the IBM ecosystem.

Yup. I still have Warp 4.5 (Aurora) on a Virtualbox VM somewhere, but
havenrCOt tried using it in a dozen years.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs
--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs Principal Consultant ElectroOptical Innovations LLC / Hobbs ElectroOptics Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: sci.electronics.design

Joe Gwinn wrote: |-----------------------------------------------------------------------|
|"On Mon, 22 Jun 2026 12:29:02 -0700, Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com>| |wrote: |
|[. . .] | |>>IBM decided to focus on Java so it sold off its Smalltalk and Ada | |>>divisions. |
|[. . .] |

I don't know what happened to Ada. |

| |
|Lost out to C/C++ in the market. |
| |
|Joe" | |-----------------------------------------------------------------------|

IBM does not support C/C++ instead of Ada. IBM favors Java instead of
C/C++. IBM sold its Ada-compiler division to a different Ada-compiler
company.
(S. HTTP://Gloucester.Insomnia247.NL/ fuer Kontaktdaten!)
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: sci.electronics.design

On Tue, 23 Jun 2026 17:31:39 -0000 (UTC), Phil Hobbs <pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:

<joegwinn@comcast.net> wrote:

On Mon, 22 Jun 2026 23:22:57 -0000 (UTC), Phil Hobbs
<pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:

<joegwinn@comcast.net> wrote:

On Mon, 22 Jun 2026 12:29:02 -0700, Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> >>>> wrote:

On Mon, 22 Jun 2026 17:20:21 -0000 (UTC), Nioclbs P<l Cailebn de
Ghloucester <thanks-to@Taf.com> wrote:

Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> wrote:
|-------------------------------------------------------|
|"On Sun, 21 Jun 2026 12:33:04 -0700, Don Y |
|<blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> wrote: |
| |

In some sense, you've gotta feel sorry for MS [. . .] |

|[. . .] |

Ditto POSIX [. . .]" |

|-------------------------------------------------------|

Eh no.

|-------------------------------------------------------|
|"[. . .] |
|<https://www.ibm.com/products/cobol-compiler-linux-x86>|
|[. . .]" |
|-------------------------------------------------------|

IBM decided to focus on Java so it sold off its Smalltalk and Ada
divisions.
(S. HTTP://Gloucester.Insomnia247.NL/ fuer Kontaktdaten!)

I don't believe it was "sold off". IBM conglomerated Smalltalk and
other languages into a single IDE (integrated development environment) >>>>> called VisualAge:
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VisualAge#Early_history>
Included were:
"BASIC, COBOL, C, C++, EGL, Fortran, Java, Pacbase, PL/I, IBM RPG, and >>>>> Smalltalk".

"VisualAge for Java is based on an extended Smalltalk virtual machine >>>>> which executes both Smalltalk and Java byte codes. Java natives were >>>>> actually implemented in Smalltalk."

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smalltalk#History>
VisualAge morphed into Eclipse Framework and possibly Web Sphere
Studio. Of course, the name continued to change:
"Cincom, GemTalk, and Instantiations, continue to sell Smalltalk
environments. IBM ended VisualAge Smalltalk, having in the late 1990s >>>>> decided to back Java instead and, as of 2005, is supported by
Instantiations, Inc.[19] Instantiations renamed the product VA
Smalltalk (VAST Platform) and continue to release new versions
yearly."

I don't know what happened to Ada.

Lost out to C/C++ in the market.

Joe

It was mostly propped up by the DoD?s insistence on its use.

Yes, although the top-down crowd was all in because Ada promised to
force programmers to be better by tying their wrists to their ankles.

I was a great fan of VisualAge C++.
Version 3.08 had by far the best debugger I?ve ever used?when one thread >>> hit a breakpoint, all threads stopped right away.

Did anyone else ever adopt that? I'm thinking it might be awkward to
implement in an interrupt-driven threaded kernel.

Dunno. AFAIR it worked fine with SMP kernels in OS/2. Around 2005 I moved >to XP and Linux on a homemade cluster (seven dual-processor pizza boxes).

IBM operation systems of the day were typically polled at ten Hertz or
so; interrupt-driven multithreaded kernels came later. HP's operating
systems did the same.

It's the difference between maximizing throughput and minimizing
latency.

I quite liked the Intel C++ compiler at the timeuit outperformed MS on >vectorized FP code by about a factor of 2, and both left that eraAs GCC in >the dust.

Yes.

That made multithread program development way easier.

Too bad it never escaped the IBM ecosystem.

Yup. I still have Warp 4.5 (Aurora) on a Virtualbox VM somewhere, but
havenAt tried using it in a dozen years.

It will likely drop into hyperspace if you even try.

Joe
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: sci.electronics.design

Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> wrote: |-----------------------------------------------------------------------|
|"MS has to drag all of their dirty laundry forward with each successive| |release lest they annoy some developer that can now no longer run | |something he wrote "a few months ago" on a new platform." | |-----------------------------------------------------------------------|

I do not feel sorry for a millionaire for making business decisions
which made it a millionaire.

"Windows 10 is being updated way too frequently (twice a year) and
each new version changes something that breaks Classic Shell."
complains a Classic-Shell programmer since 2017. Cf. HTTP://WWW.ClassicShell.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=8147

(S. HTTP://Gloucester.Insomnia247.NL/ fuer Kontaktdaten!)
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: sci.electronics.design

On 6/23/2026 5:11 PM, Niocl|is P||l Caile|in de Ghloucester wrote:

Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> wrote: |-----------------------------------------------------------------------| |"MS has to drag all of their dirty laundry forward with each successive| |release lest they annoy some developer that can now no longer run | |something he wrote "a few months ago" on a new platform." | |-----------------------------------------------------------------------|

I do not feel sorry for a millionaire for making business decisions
which made it a millionaire.

If those decisions limit your future ability to make money,
then they are consequential. Windows Phone, anybody?

Then "The Cloud" and cloud services.

Now AI.

Meanwhile, you've got talent tied up forever supporting 40+ year old
decisions.

"Windows 10 is being updated way too frequently (twice a year) and
each new version changes something that breaks Classic Shell."
complains a Classic-Shell programmer since 2017. Cf.

Some components update themselves almost daily.

But, one can say *all* OSs update themselves too frequently once
the distinction between kernel and userland got blurred in the
minds of users. And, once vendors got trapped into supporting
bolt-ons AS IF they were integral and indespensible parts of
the OS.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: sci.electronics.design

On Wed, 24 Jun 2026 00:11:03 -0000 (UTC), Nioclbs P<l Cailebn de
Ghloucester <thanks-to@Taf.com> wrote:

Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> wrote: >|-----------------------------------------------------------------------| >|"MS has to drag all of their dirty laundry forward with each successive| >|release lest they annoy some developer that can now no longer run | >|something he wrote "a few months ago" on a new platform." | >|-----------------------------------------------------------------------|

I do not feel sorry for a millionaire for making business decisions
which made it a millionaire.

That's fine as long as the millionaire didn't start out a
multi-millionaire or billionaire.

"Windows 10 is being updated way too frequently (twice a year) and
each new version changes something that breaks Classic Shell."
complains a Classic-Shell programmer since 2017. Cf. >HTTP://WWW.ClassicShell.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=8147

(S. HTTP://Gloucester.Insomnia247.NL/ fuer Kontaktdaten!)

I highly recommended Open Shell. Not including my own, I currently
support about 50 Windows machines. (I'm allegedly retired). In the
distant past, it was something like 200+ machines. Every one of those
machines are running Open Shell, a fork of the original Classic Shell: <https://github.com/Open-Shell/Open-Shell-Menu>
Please be careful with the download site as there is at least one
similarly named malware and advertisement dispensary, which I just
accidentally stumbled upon.

Open Shell offers my customers a stable desktop environment that looks
very much like previous Windows environments that my customers have
learned to use. In many cases, my customers didn't even notice that
they had a new Windows desktop environment. Open Shell updates are
mostly fixes for things Microsoft had broken. For myself, it's a huge
time saver not having to teach every user a new and allegedly improved
way to operate their computers. Currently, the Open Shell start menu
is immune to Microsoft ad injection and distracting wiggly icons. That
feature alone makes Open Shell worthwhile.
--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
PO Box 272 http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Ben Lomond CA 95005-0272 AE6KS 831-336-2558

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: sci.electronics.design

On 2026-06-23, joegwinn@comcast.net <joegwinn@comcast.net> wrote:

I was a great fan of VisualAge C++.
Version 3.08 had by far the best debugger I?ve ever used?when one thread >>>> hit a breakpoint, all threads stopped right away.

Did anyone else ever adopt that? I'm thinking it might be awkward to
implement in an interrupt-driven threaded kernel.

Dunno. AFAIR it worked fine with SMP kernels in OS/2. Around 2005 I moved >>to XP and Linux on a homemade cluster (seven dual-processor pizza boxes).

IBM operation systems of the day were typically polled at ten Hertz or
so; interrupt-driven multithreaded kernels came later. HP's operating systems did the same.

It's the difference between maximizing throughput and minimizing
latency.

When was "of the day"? IBM had interrupt-driven mutithreaded systems
back in 1967, ie: MVT.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OS/360_and_successors



--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: sci.electronics.design

On 6/23/2026 7:48 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:

On Wed, 24 Jun 2026 00:11:03 -0000 (UTC), Niocl|is P||l Caile|in de Ghloucester <thanks-to@Taf.com> wrote:

Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> wrote:
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------|
|"MS has to drag all of their dirty laundry forward with each successive|
|release lest they annoy some developer that can now no longer run |
|something he wrote "a few months ago" on a new platform." |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------|

I do not feel sorry for a millionaire for making business decisions
which made it a millionaire.

That's fine as long as the millionaire didn't start out a
multi-millionaire or billionaire.

"Windows 10 is being updated way too frequently (twice a year) and
each new version changes something that breaks Classic Shell."
complains a Classic-Shell programmer since 2017. Cf.
HTTP://WWW.ClassicShell.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=8147

(S. HTTP://Gloucester.Insomnia247.NL/ fuer Kontaktdaten!)

I highly recommended Open Shell. Not including my own, I currently
support about 50 Windows machines. (I'm allegedly retired). In the
distant past, it was something like 200+ machines. Every one of those machines are running Open Shell, a fork of the original Classic Shell: <https://github.com/Open-Shell/Open-Shell-Menu>
Please be careful with the download site as there is at least one
similarly named malware and advertisement dispensary, which I just accidentally stumbled upon.

Open Shell offers my customers a stable desktop environment that looks
very much like previous Windows environments that my customers have
learned to use. In many cases, my customers didn't even notice that
they had a new Windows desktop environment. Open Shell updates are
mostly fixes for things Microsoft had broken. For myself, it's a huge
time saver not having to teach every user a new and allegedly improved
way to operate their computers. Currently, the Open Shell start menu
is immune to Microsoft ad injection and distracting wiggly icons. That feature alone makes Open Shell worthwhile.

Adapting to the superficial changes in the desktop is annoying but largely
a fixed investment.

The killer issues, in Windows upgrades, are the ABI changes that make supporting *other* MS (and third party) apps on the new OS difficult or impossible.

SWMBO relies heavily on O2KPro which was tedious to get running on W7
(I think support ended at XP/W2K3S). The move to O2K3 would have broken
many of her apps and required a significant amount of in depth relearning
as the UI/UX in O2K3 changed as MS shifted towards supporting web-based
use of the tools.

[MS is notorious for not being *100%* forwards/backwards compatible with
their own products.]

I, personally, lament the changes that have made After Dark "troublesome"
to use.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: sci.electronics.design

On Tue, 23 Jun 2026 21:20:09 -0700, Don Y
<blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> wrote:

On 6/23/2026 7:48 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:

On Wed, 24 Jun 2026 00:11:03 -0000 (UTC), Nioclbs P<l Cailebn de
Ghloucester <thanks-to@Taf.com> wrote:

Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> wrote:
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------| >>> |"MS has to drag all of their dirty laundry forward with each successive| >>> |release lest they annoy some developer that can now no longer run | >>> |something he wrote "a few months ago" on a new platform." | >>> |-----------------------------------------------------------------------| >>>
I do not feel sorry for a millionaire for making business decisions
which made it a millionaire.

That's fine as long as the millionaire didn't start out a
multi-millionaire or billionaire.

"Windows 10 is being updated way too frequently (twice a year) and
each new version changes something that breaks Classic Shell."
complains a Classic-Shell programmer since 2017. Cf.
HTTP://WWW.ClassicShell.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=8147

(S. HTTP://Gloucester.Insomnia247.NL/ fuer Kontaktdaten!)

I highly recommended Open Shell. Not including my own, I currently
support about 50 Windows machines. (I'm allegedly retired). In the
distant past, it was something like 200+ machines. Every one of those
machines are running Open Shell, a fork of the original Classic Shell:
<https://github.com/Open-Shell/Open-Shell-Menu>
Please be careful with the download site as there is at least one
similarly named malware and advertisement dispensary, which I just
accidentally stumbled upon.

Open Shell offers my customers a stable desktop environment that looks
very much like previous Windows environments that my customers have
learned to use. In many cases, my customers didn't even notice that
they had a new Windows desktop environment. Open Shell updates are
mostly fixes for things Microsoft had broken. For myself, it's a huge
time saver not having to teach every user a new and allegedly improved
way to operate their computers. Currently, the Open Shell start menu
is immune to Microsoft ad injection and distracting wiggly icons. That
feature alone makes Open Shell worthwhile.

Adapting to the superficial changes in the desktop is annoying but largely
a fixed investment.

The killer issues, in Windows upgrades, are the ABI changes that make >supporting *other* MS (and third party) apps on the new OS difficult or >impossible.

To computer users, who are either too busy to learn new things, or too
old make the attempt, those "superficial" changes are a major
stumbling block. They will never get to application problems if they
can't get past the absolute basics.

I'm currently dealing with a customer who has the intelligence to
understand the importance of making backups, but refuses to do backups
because he's either too busy to make backup or simply doesn't want to
bother. If he runs into an application compatibility problem, he
simply buys a new computer with the latest software. That will keep
him treading water for the following 5 to 10 years or to his next
clueless mistake. A consistent user interface is critical to keeping
such customers functional. Unfortunately, most of my current
customers are like that. They're easy to spot. They don't or won't
take notes when I explain how to do something important. If I
blackmail them into taking notes, they have the amazing ability to not
be able to find those notes when they are needed. When a software
vendor (including Microsoft) makes a mistake or "improvement" that
causes problems, it usually affects thousands of users. These are not
a problem because I can usually find the answers with a web search or
on a specialized forum. Finding the solution is much easier than
teaching the user to apply it. Remote control software often fails
because the user can't find the icon on their desktop.

SWMBO relies heavily on O2KPro which was tedious to get running on W7
(I think support ended at XP/W2K3S). The move to O2K3 would have broken
many of her apps and required a significant amount of in depth relearning
as the UI/UX in O2K3 changed as MS shifted towards supporting web-based
use of the tools.

[MS is notorious for not being *100%* forwards/backwards compatible with >their own products.]

True. I'm sometimes tempted to installing VM (virtual machine)
software and staying with an older version of the applications
software. Or sometimes, it's easier to just add a 2nd computer on
their desk with a KVM switch. I have that arrangement for several
customers. It's a nice way to deal with legacy software and vendors
who use software updates as an excuse to charge large amounts for
software upgrades or force renting the new software.

I, personally, lament the changes that have made After Dark "troublesome"
to use.

After Dark is an old screen save: <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/After_Dark_(software)>
Or, did you mean some other After Dark software?
Notice the history of companies which owned After Dark ended with
Microsoft.
"Sierra Entertainment was eventually acquired by Vivendi Games, which
later merged with Activision to form Activision Blizzard, which was subsequently acquired by Microsoft."
--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
PO Box 272 http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Ben Lomond CA 95005-0272 AE6KS 831-336-2558

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: sci.electronics.design

On 6/24/2026 12:00 AM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:

Open Shell offers my customers a stable desktop environment that looks
very much like previous Windows environments that my customers have
learned to use. In many cases, my customers didn't even notice that
they had a new Windows desktop environment. Open Shell updates are
mostly fixes for things Microsoft had broken. For myself, it's a huge
time saver not having to teach every user a new and allegedly improved
way to operate their computers. Currently, the Open Shell start menu
is immune to Microsoft ad injection and distracting wiggly icons. That
feature alone makes Open Shell worthwhile.

Adapting to the superficial changes in the desktop is annoying but largely >> a fixed investment.

The killer issues, in Windows upgrades, are the ABI changes that make
supporting *other* MS (and third party) apps on the new OS difficult or
impossible.

To computer users, who are either too busy to learn new things, or too
old make the attempt, those "superficial" changes are a major
stumbling block. They will never get to application problems if they
can't get past the absolute basics.

I spent all of 5 minutes showing SWMBO how to "change users" (in case
I happened to be the "currently logged in user") and click on icons
on the "panel" (similar to MS's taskbar) to open the apps that I
had already put there for her.

Once inside those apps (Firefox and Thunderbird), everything is
basically the same.

Desktop changes seem more problematic for folks who have to
dive under the hood -- how do I set up default file associations,
set the default printer, etc.

Printing will be the next effort -- once I've set that up.
But, presently, we don't do any printing from this computer
so its not a big loss.

I'm currently dealing with a customer who has the intelligence to
understand the importance of making backups, but refuses to do backups because he's either too busy to make backup or simply doesn't want to
bother. If he runs into an application compatibility problem, he
simply buys a new computer with the latest software. That will keep
him treading water for the following 5 to 10 years or to his next
clueless mistake. A consistent user interface is critical to keeping
such customers functional. Unfortunately, most of my current
customers are like that. They're easy to spot. They don't or won't
take notes when I explain how to do something important. If I
blackmail them into taking notes, they have the amazing ability to not
be able to find those notes when they are needed. When a software
vendor (including Microsoft) makes a mistake or "improvement" that
causes problems, it usually affects thousands of users. These are not
a problem because I can usually find the answers with a web search or
on a specialized forum. Finding the solution is much easier than
teaching the user to apply it. Remote control software often fails
because the user can't find the icon on their desktop.

I spent 36 hours "recovering" a neighbors W10 box. Getting it
to boot, backing up their files, restoring to factory image,
downloading several years of updates (and "restart now, please").

She seems to think she should be able to do whatever she wants and the
computer should adapt.

Four different AV programs competing with each other, two firewalls,
four browsers, etc.

Almost 60% of RAM (32G installed) and swap -- and the CPU running
at about 40%.

After my "recovery", RAM and swap are down to 15% and 3% CPU.

I decided she would have to take a "hit" as I am tired of having to
bail her out. So, I didn't copy over her email (think" address book)
or bookmarks. Let her spend a day or two trying to get all of them
back where they belong.

Wanna bet she decides to move to Win11 thinking THAT will "solve her problem"?

[Please do! Then, I can plead ignorance (I could have pled ignorance re: W10 two months ago but she knew I had made an attempt to replace this machine with a W10 driver]

SWMBO relies heavily on O2KPro which was tedious to get running on W7
(I think support ended at XP/W2K3S). The move to O2K3 would have broken
many of her apps and required a significant amount of in depth relearning
as the UI/UX in O2K3 changed as MS shifted towards supporting web-based
use of the tools.

[MS is notorious for not being *100%* forwards/backwards compatible with
their own products.]

True. I'm sometimes tempted to installing VM (virtual machine)
software and staying with an older version of the applications
software. Or sometimes, it's easier to just add a 2nd computer on
their desk with a KVM switch. I have that arrangement for several
customers. It's a nice way to deal with legacy software and vendors
who use software updates as an excuse to charge large amounts for
software upgrades or force renting the new software.

I did that when her "finance laptop" shit the bed. I installed
a NUC with W10 (soon to be replaced with FreeBSD) wired to one
of the unused inputs on her desktop monitor. A wireless mouse
and keyboard to store in a desk drawer and she's happy (much
bigger screen and keyboard than the old laptop)

I, personally, lament the changes that have made After Dark "troublesome"
to use.

After Dark is an old screen save: <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/After_Dark_(software)>

Yes. Totally Twisted was particularly entertaining. But, it
also had hooks to immediately enable as well as *block*
screen saver activation.

[There are third party tools that can do this but I now run
multiple desktops so "the corners" are fraught with peril]

Or, did you mean some other After Dark software?
Notice the history of companies which owned After Dark ended with
Microsoft.
"Sierra Entertainment was eventually acquired by Vivendi Games, which
later merged with Activision to form Activision Blizzard, which was subsequently acquired by Microsoft."

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: sci.electronics.design

On 6/24/2026 12:16 AM, Don Y wrote:

I, personally, lament the changes that have made After Dark "troublesome" >>> to use.

After Dark is an old screen save:
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/After_Dark_(software)>

Yes.-a Totally Twisted was particularly entertaining.-a But, it
also had hooks to immediately enable as well as *block*
screen saver activation.

This is cheating as you can rewind and replay it at your leisure to
catch all of the things that are going on in the imagery. In the actual product, if you "miss something", it's gone -- enticing you to watch and
wait to see if it appears, again.

<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9syO0rvMbPg&list=PLoOqWbDi1JN2MpfCu7fGAA1wluyA9qPtR&index=13>
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: sci.electronics.design

On Mon, 22 Jun 2026 12:45:37 -0700, Don Y
<blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> wrote:

On 6/22/2026 10:20 AM, Nioclbs P<l Cailebn de Ghloucester wrote:

Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> wrote:

I didn't write anything that you quoted.

|-------------------------------------------------------|
|"On Sun, 21 Jun 2026 12:33:04 -0700, Don Y |
|<blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> wrote: |
| |

In some sense, you've gotta feel sorry for MS [. . .] |

|[. . .] |

Ditto POSIX [. . .]" |

|-------------------------------------------------------|

Eh no.

Would YOU like to be forever supporting decisions you'd made
10, 20, 40 years ago?
Continually "evolving" a product
while constrained never to leave past applications (yours
as well as those of others) behind?

I helped design marine radios for about 9 years. Product support was
provided by whomever the switchboard directed the phone call. I made
the mistake of passing out business cards at a boat show, and was soon
cursed with a deluge of support call from out dealers. It wasn't fun,
but having the engineers talk directly to the dealers, and sometimes
the customers, was a good way of connecting the engineers directly to
problems encountered in the field. My only complaint was the general
lack of "service notes" documentation, which would have reduced the
number of repeat calls. (Note: This was in the days of BBS's and well
before the internet).

Anecdote: After the introduction of a new product, we typically
received numerous calls from dealers over "repair" issues. However,
one product had the service manual delivered about 3 months after the
products were shipped. Initially, there were very few phone calls
from dealers or customers. After the service manuals were shipped, we
were buried in a deluge of phone calls from dealers and customers
attempted to tune, repair or install their radios.

[I suspect there is a variant of the "horse designed by committee"
joke that accurately reflects the issues of "evolved" designs]

At the time, it was impossible to sell radios in the commercial marine
radio sector without a lifetime warranty. We tried to make "evolved" replacement PCB's so that they were plug compatible with the older
models. We had several such replacement PCB's where an IC and a few
parts replaced a board full of discrete components. Fortunately, the
rest of the industry realized that a lifetime warranty would
eventually turn into a liability. So, we switched to a limited
warranty and lived happily ever after.

I've never reused code as clients like to think they paid for
a certain set of character strings. But, *design* reuse is
far more effective. Persistence of ideas (models) instead of
cut-and-paste of "code".

I did hardware, not software. It was not beneath my dignity to
reverse engineer the competition, improve the design, and use it for a
new product. That's much the same as your "cut-and-paste" code
example. I infringed on someone's patent only once in 9 years.

This gives me the ability to explore different design approaches
without burdening a new project with support for code developed
for an old one. Each OS can present a different API and different
notion of hardware abstractions that the "current project" can
explore to determine their efficacy -- cherry pick the ideas and
models that have the most value and leave the "mistakes" behind.

Ok, but that's hardly "cut-and-paste". It's more like "cut-paste-analyze-modify-etc".

MS has to drag all of their dirty laundry forward with each successive >release lest they annoy some developer that can now no longer run
something he wrote "a few months ago" on a new platform.

It's ok to borrow code from anyone and anything as long as it's not
your own code? Did I get that right?

Incidentally, I was once ordered to clone a radio that they were
private labeling. There were several circuits which were marginal. I
asked if I should fix these. The answer was a thundering no. They
wanted an exact copy, bugs and all. I asked "why" and was ignored. I
followed instructions, but wasn't very happy. Eventually, I couldn't
stand it any more. I went to the president's office and ask him why I
was copying a radio that didn't work. He said it was to prove to the manufacturer that we were able to copy the radio. If they wanted to
continue the private labeling arrangement, they should lower their
price or risk competing with one of their major customers. I thought
about the situation for 2 days and submitted my resignation.
--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
PO Box 272 http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Ben Lomond CA 95005-0272 AE6KS 831-336-2558

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: sci.electronics.design

On Wed, 24 Jun 2026 03:05:14 -0000 (UTC), Michael Stein
<mas@ZLVFC.COM> wrote:

On 2026-06-23, joegwinn@comcast.net <joegwinn@comcast.net> wrote:

I was a great fan of VisualAge C++.
Version 3.08 had by far the best debugger I?ve ever used?when one thread >>>>> hit a breakpoint, all threads stopped right away.

Did anyone else ever adopt that? I'm thinking it might be awkward to
implement in an interrupt-driven threaded kernel.

Dunno. AFAIR it worked fine with SMP kernels in OS/2. Around 2005 I moved >>>to XP and Linux on a homemade cluster (seven dual-processor pizza boxes). >>

IBM operation systems of the day were typically polled at ten Hertz or
so; interrupt-driven multithreaded kernels came later. HP's operating
systems did the same.

It's the difference between maximizing throughput and minimizing
latency.

When was "of the day"? IBM had interrupt-driven mutithreaded systems
back in 1967, ie: MVT.

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OS/360_and_successors>

I'm thinking 1980s and some of the 1990s.

MVT never appeared in my world. I'll have to look into it. May be
that it was trapped on expensive IBM in the era where UNIX was
emerging.

Joe
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: sci.electronics.design

<joegwinn@comcast.net> wrote:

On Wed, 24 Jun 2026 03:05:14 -0000 (UTC), Michael Stein
<mas@ZLVFC.COM> wrote:

On 2026-06-23, joegwinn@comcast.net <joegwinn@comcast.net> wrote:

I was a great fan of VisualAge C++.
Version 3.08 had by far the best debugger I?ve ever used?when one thread >>>>>> hit a breakpoint, all threads stopped right away.

Did anyone else ever adopt that? I'm thinking it might be awkward to >>>>> implement in an interrupt-driven threaded kernel.

Dunno. AFAIR it worked fine with SMP kernels in OS/2. Around 2005 I moved
to XP and Linux on a homemade cluster (seven dual-processor pizza boxes). >>>

IBM operation systems of the day were typically polled at ten Hertz or
so; interrupt-driven multithreaded kernels came later. HP's operating
systems did the same.

It's the difference between maximizing throughput and minimizing
latency.

When was "of the day"? IBM had interrupt-driven mutithreaded systems
back in 1967, ie: MVT.

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OS/360_and_successors>

I'm thinking 1980s and some of the 1990s.

MVT never appeared in my world. I'll have to look into it. May be
that it was trapped on expensive IBM in the era where UNIX was
emerging.

Joe

MVS, iirc.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs
--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs Principal Consultant ElectroOptical Innovations LLC / Hobbs ElectroOptics Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: sci.electronics.design

On 2026-06-24, Phil Hobbs <pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:

When was "of the day"? IBM had interrupt-driven mutithreaded systems
back in 1967, ie: MVT.

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OS/360_and_successors>

I'm thinking 1980s and some of the 1990s.

MVT never appeared in my world. I'll have to look into it. May be
that it was trapped on expensive IBM in the era where UNIX was
emerging.

Joe

MVS, iirc.

MVT was the predecessor of MVS. MVT dispatched the highest priority
ready task (IBM speek for thread). All batch, single core/CPU, 24 bit
address space. 29MB disk drives.

No interactive access, no timeslicing, just interrupts.

Later evolution added interactive access (TSO), multiple cores/CPUs,
virtual storage. 31 bit address space, 64 bit address space.

And name changes: MVS, ..., now z/OS

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: sci.electronics.design

On 6/24/2026 9:37 AM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:

Anecdote: After the introduction of a new product, we typically
received numerous calls from dealers over "repair" issues. However,
one product had the service manual delivered about 3 months after the products were shipped. Initially, there were very few phone calls
from dealers or customers. After the service manuals were shipped, we
were buried in a deluge of phone calls from dealers and customers
attempted to tune, repair or install their radios.

Documenting a product (especially if you had no role in its design
or development -- or, "aren't technical") is a delightfully
challenging experience!

You've never *used* the product yet have to imagine how someone
would use it and what sorts of questions they would ask. Then,
sort out how to organize the documentation so THEY could find it.
(creating an index is doubly challenging as you have to think of
the various terms one might search for regardless of what *you*
have chosen for the lexicon).

Then, you have to decide how much you WANT the user to know as
that can encourage and discourage efforts in directions that you
may or may not want to support. Tell him the pinout of a connector
and now you're likely to field questions about folks wanting to
(ab)use it for some unforeseen purpose -- and, angry when they
can't do what they want with it because you neglected to _____.

[I suspect there is a variant of the "horse designed by committee"
joke that accurately reflects the issues of "evolved" designs]

At the time, it was impossible to sell radios in the commercial marine
radio sector without a lifetime warranty. We tried to make "evolved" replacement PCB's so that they were plug compatible with the older
models. We had several such replacement PCB's where an IC and a few
parts replaced a board full of discrete components. Fortunately, the
rest of the industry realized that a lifetime warranty would
eventually turn into a liability. So, we switched to a limited
warranty and lived happily ever after.

You just have to be creative about defining "lifetime". I offered
clients "free bugfixes" -- but, only while I kept the business open.

I've never reused code as clients like to think they paid for
a certain set of character strings. But, *design* reuse is
far more effective. Persistence of ideas (models) instead of
cut-and-paste of "code".

I did hardware, not software. It was not beneath my dignity to
reverse engineer the competition, improve the design, and use it for a
new product. That's much the same as your "cut-and-paste" code
example. I infringed on someone's patent only once in 9 years.

I started off doing mainly hardware (designing CPUs) but quickly
found that you can design hardware in a few weeks that would
take months or years to crate the software that would run on it.

And, the more clever/inexpensive the hardware design, the more you
migrated into the software so a small (time) savings in the hardware
design could end up dramatically increasing the "cost" of the software.

Now, I find I can write code to emulate things that I would have wanted
in hardware as machines are fast enough that the "emulation overhead"
is negligible (and saves having to go to a foundry to roll some custom silicon).

I always left an "out" in contracts indicating that I would never knowingly infringe on a patent -- but, the liability for any such infringement
would lie entirely with the client. (you want me to make guarantees?
then factor in my retaining a patent lawyer on your behalf but without
your control!)

This gives me the ability to explore different design approaches
without burdening a new project with support for code developed
for an old one. Each OS can present a different API and different
notion of hardware abstractions that the "current project" can
explore to determine their efficacy -- cherry pick the ideas and
models that have the most value and leave the "mistakes" behind.

Ok, but that's hardly "cut-and-paste". It's more like "cut-paste-analyze-modify-etc".

No. The "cutting and pasting" happens entirely in my head.
"This is how I approached this problem. Is it -- or something
similar -- appropriate for this NEW problem?"

So, I always had to recreate functionality from scratch.

But, *writing* code takes very little time. *Designing* it is
where you spend your time and effort. And, once you've designed
a particular functionality (model), you already have learned the
important issues to address as you reimplement it (in a different
language, API, target platform, etc.)

MS has to drag all of their dirty laundry forward with each successive
release lest they annoy some developer that can now no longer run
something he wrote "a few months ago" on a new platform.

It's ok to borrow code from anyone and anything as long as it's not
your own code? Did I get that right?

I don't use anyone's code in my products/projects. My copyrights are
"clean". (I may use someone else's *product* in a design but then
it is subject to THEIR copyright).

Incidentally, I was once ordered to clone a radio that they were
private labeling. There were several circuits which were marginal. I
asked if I should fix these. The answer was a thundering no. They
wanted an exact copy, bugs and all. I asked "why" and was ignored. I followed instructions, but wasn't very happy. Eventually, I couldn't
stand it any more. I went to the president's office and ask him why I
was copying a radio that didn't work. He said it was to prove to the manufacturer that we were able to copy the radio. If they wanted to
continue the private labeling arrangement, they should lower their
price or risk competing with one of their major customers. I thought
about the situation for 2 days and submitted my resignation.

We had a japanese company tour our facility early in my career.
Folks were excited when they decided to purchase (25?) radars.
A year later, we bought one of THEIR radars to see that it was
"inspired" (I don't want to say "copied") by ours. It was
interesting to sese the changes they had made to the design and
slap ourselves over how obvious some of the ideas were -- yet
we had missed them!

For example, we had a multislotted encoder wheel to monitor the
orientation ("azimuth") of the antenna. This was affixed to the
antenna shaft. *They* had a cheap, crude "few slot" encoder
on the upstream side of the gear reduction assembly exploiting the
fact that the reduction effectively magnified the resolution of
the encoder letting the cost and complexity of their encoder be peanuts.

"Gee, why didn't WE think of that?!"
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2