 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 4/19/2011 8:55, Invisible wrote:
> How did you know it's something to do with SMB?
MRxSmb
Plus, "redirector" and "connector" are terms that SMB uses to describe the
different parts of the stack. The "redirector" is the part that takes the
request to X:\... and turns it into a request to \\server\share\... by
intercepting the request and redirecting it to the appropriate networking
layers.
The connector is, I think, the part that actually transports the SMB
protocol over an underlying protocol.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
"Coding without comments is like
driving without turn signals."
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 4/19/2011 9:13, Darren New wrote:
> On 4/19/2011 8:55, Invisible wrote:
>> How did you know it's something to do with SMB?
>
> MRxSmb
Note, btw, that I didn't even need to put in the error number.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
"Coding without comments is like
driving without turn signals."
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Tue, 19 Apr 2011 10:45:36 +0100, Invisible wrote:
> On 18/04/2011 17:07, Jim Henderson wrote:
>> On Sun, 17 Apr 2011 15:50:10 +0100, Orchid XP v8 wrote:
>>
>>> Meh. I remember when you couldn't *get* software without paying money
>>> for it! :-P
>>>
>>> $20 for a word processor isn't expensive. $200 is.
>>
>> Then you must be older than you claim, because freeware has been around
>> nearly as long as computing has been.
>
> I don't know about freeware. When I was a kid, "shareware" was very
> popular. Every issue of Amiga Format would come loaded down with useful
> little utilities that people had written, which you were /supposed/ to
> send money for if you use it regularly. I don't personally know of
> anybody who actually sent a cheque for 4 CHF or whatever to the remote
> country where the author lived.
Most of the magazines I entered code in had no such request. But
freeware was all the rage (along with shareware) back then.
>> $200 isn't very much money if you have it. We've been over that
>> before.
>
> OK, so apparently $200 is currently roughly £120. (Which still doesn't
> take into account average incomes, average cost of living, etc., which
> presumably also differs between the UK and the US.) Even so, it still
> seems like a hell of a lot of money for a program that doesn't even *do*
> very much and isn't especially complicated.
If it isn't especially complicated, then why do you have problems
understanding what some of the options do or are for?
> Silly me, I'm thinking that prices have something to do with what it
> costs to produce something. This is the 21st century. Prices are driven
> by how much you can rip people off and get away with it...
Have you written a word processor? Do you know how much work and testing
goes into creating something like MS Word or OpenOffice Writer?
You are making the mistake of assuming it *must* be easy.
>> But as Darren said, if you don't want to pay $200 for it, don't - use a
>> free alternative. But don't be surprised if you discover that the free
>> version doesn't have the same features as the $200 one does or can't
>> read the files that people send you.
>
> I *do* use one of the free alternatives. At home, anyway. At work, I use
> what my employer provides. More to the point, I have to *support* what
> my employer provides, which is why it's so infuriating that there's no
> documentation. [Which is how this discussion started in the first
> place.]
But Andy, it's just a simple word processor. Nothing goes into it,
remember? $200 is too expensive, so clearly it must be easy to use.
(Yes, I'm using sarcasm again)
> Of course, OpenOffice has no documentation either. But then you're just
> grateful to be getting a reasonably good bit of software for free...
I find the built-in help to be pretty useful myself.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Tue, 19 Apr 2011 08:46:29 -0700, Darren New wrote:
> On 4/19/2011 2:45, Invisible wrote:
>> I don't personally know of anybody who actually sent a cheque
>
> AFAIK, I'm the only person in the entire world that ever paid for
> WinZip.
I know my employer has a corporate license.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Tue, 19 Apr 2011 10:34:06 +0100, Invisible wrote:
>>>>> Where the hell rents movies for a dollar?
>>>>
>>>> http://tinyurl.com/3q2n7c9
>>>>
>>>> Tell me you didn't expect this answer.
>>>
>>> How bizare... This really exists?
>>
>> No, I had a free hour and decided to mock up a website just so I could
>> provide that answer to you. It's completely a fantasy made up just so
>> I could answer this question in this way.
>
> I love the way it says "why pay $4 or $5 to buy a movie when you can
> rent one?"
>
> You know, given that movies /actually/ cost about £15 or so, not $4
> [which is apparently about £2.50 at present].
Depends on where you shop. If you shop at used DVD stores (yes, those
exist as well) you can pick up many titles for dirt cheap.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Tue, 19 Apr 2011 10:31:01 +0100, Invisible wrote:
> On 19/04/2011 00:35, Jim Henderson wrote:
>
>> I'm glad I put that into that site as well, just to make the illusion
>> complete. ;)
>>
>> Along with the dispenser locator. ;)
>
> http://questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=1144
Now you're beginning to understand. ;)
You're actually the star in a real-life edition of "The Truman Show".
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Tue, 19 Apr 2011 10:37:00 +0100, Invisible wrote:
> On 18/04/2011 17:09, Jim Henderson wrote:
>> On Mon, 18 Apr 2011 09:02:19 +0100, Invisible wrote:
>>
>>> In reality, MS Word is /the only/ word processor that anybody ever
>>> uses. I tiny few people might use OpenOffice these days, but most
>>> people have never heard of it. To them, a word processor = MS Word.
>>
>> So, where did you pull the statistics for the number of people who use
>> OpenOffice? Did you just invent that statistic, or do you have a
>> citation?
>>
>> Most of the people I deal with use OpenOffice and prefer it to Word.
>> So if you're just going with anecdotal evidence based on your own
>> experiences, that's fine, but don't cite that as if it's fact.
>
> Admittedly I don't know hundreds of thousands of people. Still, the vast
> majority of people I know IRL don't know what Linux is, have never heard
> of Firefox, and think MS Office is the only "proper" office suite. You
> know, as if anything you can download for free off the Internet is
> either an illegal pirate copy or a shoddy imitation.
Many people do feel that way. I remember reading a story in the past
year about a teacher who told a student to get rid of that Linux stuff
because they must've pirated it - nobody gives stuff away for free.
> If you're going to tell me that among computer experts the picture is
> different, then sure. But how many people are computer experts?
Not everyone I work with at work is a computer expert.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Tue, 19 Apr 2011 10:56:04 +0100, Invisible wrote:
>>> STOP messages you can usually look up. (Almost all of them mean
>>> "something happened which is never supposed to happen. Go check your
>>> hardware and device drivers." But then, I guess that's the nature of a
>>> kernel failure...)
>>
>> Um, yes, STOP messages are a type of ABEND (ie, Abnormal End) of the
>> kernel.
>
> Usually "unhandled kernel-mode exception" or "page fault in non-paged
> area". Fortunately, I haven't seen one of these for years now. I used to
> see them almost daily.
I did as well, but then I switched to Linux. I think in the 15 years or
so I've been using Linux now, I've seen the kernel panic maybe twice (and
the second time was trying to reproduce the first time so I could file a
bug report).
>> But those aren't the only error messages I ever had to look up, and I
>> never really had a problem finding *something* about the error I was
>> running into, that was my point.
>
> Perhaps you can tell me what event #3019 from MRxSmb means then, because
> the description merely says "the redirector failed to determine the
> connection type". (WHAT redirector? WHAT connection? WTF?)
First hit on Google:
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/889000
That article links to another that says it's an informational message and
can be safely ignored.
Search terms: 3019 mrxsmb
Total time: About 30 seconds
>> I'm not really sure what that has to do with what I was saying....
>
> Once upon a time, a compiler or interpreter would have come with an
> extensive user manual. Today you get far less.
Depends on the compiler and the language. One example of an esoteric
compiler used by a small group of people doesn't make a 'trend'.
> Then again, GHC costs nothing. The Pascal compiler I used to use cost me
> £80. (!!)
Meh. I paid something like $250 for the Borland C compiler when I was in
college (or just before I went to college). I probably still have it
somewhere.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 4/19/2011 11:04, Jim Henderson wrote:
> If it isn't especially complicated, then why do you have problems
> understanding what some of the options do or are for?
Bazinga?
> Have you written a word processor? Do you know how much work and testing
> goes into creating something like MS Word or OpenOffice Writer?
Actually, I think there's probably more work than most OSS projects would
want to spend just getting the documentation right.
>> Of course, OpenOffice has no documentation either. But then you're just
>> grateful to be getting a reasonably good bit of software for free...
>
> I find the built-in help to be pretty useful myself.
Ever notice how the OSS projects that *really* take off are the ones that
have good documentation? And the ones that limp along on three paws are the
ones where you scour the internet to find half-ass tutorials on the version
five years old?
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
"Coding without comments is like
driving without turn signals."
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Tue, 19 Apr 2011 11:28:38 -0700, Darren New wrote:
> On 4/19/2011 11:04, Jim Henderson wrote:
>> If it isn't especially complicated, then why do you have problems
>> understanding what some of the options do or are for?
>
> Bazinga?
:)
>> Have you written a word processor? Do you know how much work and
>> testing goes into creating something like MS Word or OpenOffice Writer?
>
> Actually, I think there's probably more work than most OSS projects
> would want to spend just getting the documentation right.
Yes, I think that's likely.
>>> Of course, OpenOffice has no documentation either. But then you're
>>> just grateful to be getting a reasonably good bit of software for
>>> free...
>>
>> I find the built-in help to be pretty useful myself.
>
> Ever notice how the OSS projects that *really* take off are the ones
> that have good documentation? And the ones that limp along on three
> paws are the ones where you scour the internet to find half-ass
> tutorials on the version five years old?
I would agree that documentation is important - but also usability and
stability are probably equal factors. Good documentation with crap
software doesn't really go far either.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
