• Announcements

    • Robin

      Welcome!   03/05/2016

      Welcome, everyone, to the new 910CMX Community Forums. I'm still working on getting them running, so things may change.  If you're a 910 Comic creator and need your forum recreated, let me know and I'll get on it right away.  I'll do my best to make this new place as fun as the last one!
partner555

Story: Friday 24 Feb 2017

124 posts in this topic

6 hours ago, hkmaly said:

Considering the internal number will continue to grow but the external is supposed to stay 10, wouldn't that be pointless?

My understanding of it is that Microsoft is planning to do like Apple has done and consider all new OS releases to be an upgrade package to their "number ten". Thus, just as all new MacOS releases have been considered part of OSX, all new Windows releases will be considered part of Windows 10.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hence why when you "shut down and install updates", you have to wait until it's finished shutting down and allegedly finished installing updates, then try to turn it on and log in again, in case it's set to lock you out while it installs an entire "edition" for several hours after that.

I am still angry about this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, HarJIT said:

Hence why when you "shut down and install updates", you have to wait until it's finished shutting down and allegedly finished installing updates, then try to turn it on and log in again, in case it's set to lock you out while it installs an entire "edition" for several hours after that.

I am still angry about this.

Still another reason to stick to Windows 7. I am so glad I declined that 'free upgrade.'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find the extended automatic install-update-on-shutdown issue especially problematic when my whole reason for shutting down was due to my battery charge being critically low (and therefore not enough uptime left to power the installation). Really, the install should happen at the next startup rather than during shutdown.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, ijuin said:

I find the extended automatic install-update-on-shutdown issue especially problematic when my whole reason for shutting down was due to my battery charge being critically low (and therefore not enough uptime left to power the installation). Really, the install should happen at the next startup rather than during shutdown.

I suppose if the entire thing happens at startup, and the option to install or defer is presented at startup, yes.

What I was referring to was leaving it to install updates and shut down overnight, then powering it up the next morning with the intention of using it to find I was locked out for another several hours yet (even though it had allegedly finished installing updates) with no escape as it finished installing the anniversary edition.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, well, the whole "computer locks you out while it installs" thing is more damaging to the computer if it is happening under a typical "must shut down NOW" sort of deadline such as when power is going to be cut off. It is comparatively less common for starting up to be as time-critical with a "you could wreck your hard drive" threat as consequence. Yes, it is super inconvenient to have your system unavailable while it installs, but usually it's less than "your hard drive is fried because your battery died in the middle of shutdown".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 03/04/2017 at 1:55 PM, HarJIT said:

Hence why when you "shut down and install updates", you have to wait until it's finished shutting down and allegedly finished installing updates, then try to turn it on and log in again, in case it's set to lock you out while it installs an entire "edition" for several hours after that.

But remember, if they didn't do it that way, users might - gasp - refuse to install the updates! Especially if they know what's inside.

On 03/04/2017 at 2:59 PM, The Old Hack said:

Still another reason to stick to Windows 7. I am so glad I declined that 'free upgrade.'

Or upgrade to linux.

That 'free upgrade' was neither free nor upgrade.

On 03/04/2017 at 5:32 PM, ijuin said:

Yes, well, the whole "computer locks you out while it installs" thing is more damaging to the computer if it is happening under a typical "must shut down NOW" sort of deadline such as when power is going to be cut off. It is comparatively less common for starting up to be as time-critical with a "you could wreck your hard drive" threat as consequence. Yes, it is super inconvenient to have your system unavailable while it installs, but usually it's less than "your hard drive is fried because your battery died in the middle of shutdown".

Only way the upgrade will not be inconvenient would be if they let user choose when it happens. Person who actually USE the computer will object both if it won't allow to be used when he starts it in morning to start working AND if it won't turn off in night when he really want the computer to be quiet so he can sleep.

Note that it IS possible to do most of upgrade on running system. If the system is designed by someone with actual brain. Case in point, almost any distribution of linux. It would still be inconvenient if you can't choose time to upgrade.

 

HarJIT likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, hkmaly said:
22 hours ago, The Old Hack said:

Still another reason to stick to Windows 7. I am so glad I declined that 'free upgrade.'

Or upgrade to linux.

That 'free upgrade' was neither free not upgrade.

In terms of some software fields, like music, Win10 could be considered a valid upgrade. I run Cakewalk SONAR Platinum, and it likes Windows 10 very much. So do the plug-ins that I use with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, hkmaly said:

Or upgrade to linux.

[…]

Note that it IS possible to do most of upgrade on running system. If the system is designed by someone with actual brain. Case in point, almost any distribution of linux. It would still be inconvenient if you can't choose time to upgrade.

Oh, I use Ubuntu when I can get away with it.

Seriously, even kernel updates can be run to completion in the background to take immediate effect on next boot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, ProfessorTomoe said:
On 03/05/2017 at 4:09 AM, hkmaly said:

That 'free upgrade' was neither free not upgrade.

In terms of some software fields, like music, Win10 could be considered a valid upgrade. I run Cakewalk SONAR Platinum, and it likes Windows 10 very much. So do the plug-ins that I use with it.

Well ... there is also DirectX 12, which is upgrade compared to DirectX 11 (although not compared to Vulcan). Except only reason to not put it into Windows 7 was that they wanted some reason for people to downgrade to Windows 10. (Case in point, Vulcan works in Windows 7.)

14 hours ago, HarJIT said:

Oh, I use Ubuntu when I can get away with it.

Seriously, even kernel updates can be run to completion in the background to take immediate effect on next boot.

Of course it can, but note that it's not "even" ... there are applications which reacts to being upgraded worse than kernel. Kernel has the advantage of being whole in memory, so it can be safely deferred. Daemons are usually stopped, upgraded and started again, which can be inconvenient on servers ... upgrading MySQL can mean several whole minutes of it not running!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ijuin said:

Minutes! The horror!

A SQL server being down for only minutes can be very costly if those minutes aren't inside an opportune maintenance window. In a lot of businesses, when the database is down, everything stops. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Drasvin said:
10 hours ago, ijuin said:

Minutes! The horror!

A SQL server being down for only minutes can be very costly if those minutes aren't inside an opportune maintenance window. In a lot of businesses, when the database is down, everything stops. 

Exactly.

(In fact, I'm surprised at your implication that some businesses DON'T stop completely when their main database is down. Well, maybe with good replication, but I don't think MySQL supports any good.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, hkmaly said:

Exactly.

(In fact, I'm surprised at your implication that some businesses DON'T stop completely when their main database is down. Well, maybe with good replication, but I don't think MySQL supports any good.)

The store downstairs works perfectly when their main database is down. They just pick it up off the floor, dust it off and put it back on the table.

Admittedly it is a furniture polishing and repair shop, and they use old fashioned paper books to keep track of their customers. This saves a great deal on downtime, antivirus and annoying upgrades.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, The Old Hack said:
23 hours ago, hkmaly said:

Exactly.

(In fact, I'm surprised at your implication that some businesses DON'T stop completely when their main database is down. Well, maybe with good replication, but I don't think MySQL supports any good.)

The store downstairs works perfectly when their main database is down. They just pick it up off the floor, dust it off and put it back on the table.

Admittedly it is a furniture polishing and repair shop, and they use old fashioned paper books to keep track of their customers. This saves a great deal on downtime, antivirus and annoying upgrades.

Actually they don't. Obviously, when their database is down their clients needs to wait until it's picked up. It's just that it's not happening so often and it's not so long, so they can afford the downtime.

And while they are safe from viruses, they need to look for booklices and molds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, hkmaly said:

Actually they don't. Obviously, when their database is down their clients needs to wait until it's picked up. It's just that it's not happening so often and it's not so long, so they can afford the downtime.

And while they are safe from viruses, they need to look for booklices and molds.

Making backup copies takes a lot longer, took.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, ProfessorTomoe said:
4 minutes ago, hkmaly said:

Actually they don't. Obviously, when their database is down their clients needs to wait until it's picked up. It's just that it's not happening so often and it's not so long, so they can afford the downtime.

And while they are safe from viruses, they need to look for booklices and molds.

Making backup copies takes a lot longer, took.

If they have one.

It's also more likely the copying will introduce some differences.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, hkmaly said:

If they have one.

It's also more likely the copying will introduce some differences.

Needless to say (but I am saying it anyway), Turbotax need not apply...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, ProfessorTomoe said:

Making backup copies takes a lot longer

 

13 minutes ago, hkmaly said:

If they have one.

It's also more likely the copying will introduce some differences.

Do we need to call in Brother Dominic again?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, hkmaly said:

It's also more likely the copying will introduce some differences.

I am sure I posted this one before but darn it all, this is the best thing ever when it comes to unintentional differences while creating copies:

    Just by way of example:

- 'A man shalt not marry his grandmother's wife' - The Affinity Bible
of 1923.
- 'And Rebekah arose, and her camels' - Gen 24:61, The Camels Bible of
1823 (they're normally her damsels; witchcraft is suspected)
- In Luke 22:34 of the Denial Bible of 1792, the apostle who denies
Jesus is called Philip.
- 'I discharge thee before God ... that thou observe these things'
Timothy 5:21, The Discharge Bible of 1806
- 'Who hath ears to ear, let him hear' - Matthew 13:43, The Ears to
Ear Bible of 1810.
- 'The fool hath said in his heart that there is a God' - Psalm 14:1,
The Fools Bible of the reign of Charles I.
- 'Her sins which are many are forgotten' (instead of forgiven) Luke
7:47, The Forgotten Sins Bible of 1638.
- A 1611 edition transposes Judas in place of Jesus in Matthew 26:36.
- 'Shall I bring to the birth and not cease to bring forth' Isaiah
66:9, The Large Family Bible of 1820 (it's supposed to be cause to
bring forth).
- The Lions Bible of 1804 gives us (among others):
    'The murderer shall surely be put together' (instead of to
death) Numbers 25:18;
    'But thy son shall come forth out of thy lions' 1 Kings 8:19;
    'For thy flesh lusteth after the spirit' (and not against it)
Galatians 5:17.
- 'and there was more sea' Revelation 1641, The More Sea Bible of 1641
(there is in fact no more sea).
- 'These are murderers' Jude 16, The Murderers' Bible of 1801 (they
are actually murmurers, a lesser crime unless they were in the
theatre).
- 'Blessed are the placemakers' Matthew 5:9, The Placemakers' Bible of
1562.
- 'printers have persecuted me without a cause' Psalm 119:161, The
Printers' Bible (veiled critique of management or just a typo?
Ordinarily the persecuters are princes).
- 'sin on more' John 5:14, The 'Sin on' Bible of 1716.
- 'And it shall come to pass that the fishes shall stand upon it'
Ezekiel 47:10, The Standing Fishes Bible of 1806.
- 'the sting of his tongue' (rather than the string) Mark 7:35, The
Sting Bible of 1746.
- The 'To remain' Bible of 1805 failed to remove the eponymous
editor's marginal comment from the line 'persecuted him that was born
after the spirit to remain, even so it is now' (Galatians 4:29), an
error repeated in two later editions produced by the Bible Society in
1805 and 1819.
- 'Know ye not that the unrighteous shall inherit the Kingdom of God'
1 Corinithians 6:9, The Unrighteous Bible of 1653. Moreover, Romans
6:13 has 'Neither yield ye your members as instruments of
righteousness unto sin'.
- An edition of 1717 calls the Parable of the Vineyard in Luke 20 the
Parable of the Vinegar.
- 'Thou shalt commit adultery' Exodus 20:14, The wicked (or
Adulterous) Bible. The fine ruined the printer.
- 'Buggre Alle this for a Larke. I ame sick to mye Hart of
typefetting. Master Bilton if no Gentleman, and Master Scagges noe
more than a tightfisted Southwarke Knobbefticke. I telle you, onne a
day laike thif Ennywone withe half an oz. of Sense should bee oute in
the Sunneshain, ane notte Stucke here alle the liuelong daie inn thif
mowldey olde By-Our-Lady Workfhoppe. @*"AE@;!*' Ezekiel 48:5, The
Buggre Alle this Bible of 1651, also notable for containing
twenty-seven verses in the third chapter of Genesis, instead of the
more usual twenty-four.
    They followed verse 24, which in the King James Version reads:
    'So he drove out the man; and he placed at the east of the
garden of Eden Cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way,
to keep the way of the tree of life', and read:
    25 And the Lord spake unto the Angel that guarded the eastern
gate, /saying/ Where is the flaming sword which was given unto thee?
    26 And the Angel said, I had it here only a moment ago, I must
have put /it/ down somewhere, forget my own head next.
    27 And the Lord did not ask him again.

    Thanks and all respect to Messrs Gaiman and Pratchett, but the
rest are kosher... urm, or whatever. These are just some of the
typesetting errors which got noticed, and in most cases a single word
or letter changes meanings quite radically.

With my thanks to my old friend Luke Slater for this list.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, The Old Hack said:

I am sure I posted this one before but darn it all, this is the best thing ever when it comes to unintentional differences while creating copies:

Quote

... and I would like to add that this is in BIBLE. One would expect people making copies of Bible would be extra careful out of fear they are risking not only fine, but possibly their soul. Therefore, I would take it as proof that humans are not capable of copying longer text without errors.

(Hmmm ... how many mistakes were made when copying Quran and did someone of those who did them survived?)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, hkmaly said:

Therefore, I would take it as proof that humans are not capable of copying longer text without errors.

Longer texts? I sometimes have trouble making it all the way through a sentence without messing it up somehow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, The Old Hack said:
1 hour ago, hkmaly said:

Therefore, I would take it as proof that humans are not capable of copying longer text without errors.

Longer texts? I sometimes have trouble making it all the way through a sentence without messing it up somehow.

Well, me too, but only sometimes. I know I'm CAPABLE to copy short text without errors manually, if it's important and I have time. That doesn't mean I'm writing without errors all the time, only that usually I don't have the time or don't see it as so important. (Or, well, I'm not copying.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, hkmaly said:

Well, me too, but only sometimes. I know I'm CAPABLE to copy short text without errors manually, if it's important and I have time. That doesn't mean I'm writing without errors all the time, only that usually I don't have the time or don't see it as so important. (Or, well, I'm not copying.)

I was mainly supporting your point, namely that humans are all too fallible. As a matter of fact, that lovely list came from a discussion in which someone had claimed that the Bible hadn't changed since it was put into writing. We found that claim somewhat optimistic. >.>

(This is not even mentioning translation inaccuracies and errors, which make matters still worse. And the way even the same language may change, causing a particular statement to have a different meaning even if it is written exactly the same way...)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, The Old Hack said:

I was mainly supporting your point, namely that humans are all too fallible. As a matter of fact, that lovely list came from a discussion in which someone had claimed that the Bible hadn't changed since it was put into writing. We found that claim somewhat optimistic. >.>

Master of Understatement

24 minutes ago, The Old Hack said:

This is not even mentioning translation inaccuracies and errors, which make matters still worse. And the way even the same language may change, causing a particular statement to have a different meaning even if it is written exactly the same way...

... damn, I don't have any better reaction that the image I already used.

Translation "inaccuracies" are especially problematic because lot of phrases CANT be translated correctly even if God himself would be doing the translation (and I don't think there is any Christians claiming that ... or are they?)

On the other hand, even translation "inaccuracies" are nothing compared to the fact that bible lost whole BOOKS.

The Old Hack likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now