Free Woodworking Report Available

Page 5 of 9  
"Tom Watson" wrote in message

Ah yes, Magister Ludi ... a surfeit of "links".
"Disciples come no longer to be blessed, Nor masters to invite an argument."
--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 11/06/04
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sun, 27 Feb 2005 20:17:03 -0700, Swingman wrote

Proprietary is when a company develops and keeps secret some technology or IP (that is intellectual property, not internet protocol just to be sure you understand). They guard this as a company secret. If you understood the computer industry you would get it.
Apple has had the protocol open to third party vendors to facilitate deployment and acceptance. When a protocol is termed "proprietary" it is in terms of a single entity directing development.

But you don't seem able to grasp that protocols exist to transport other protocols (i.e. IP-internet protocol for the slow). You will find methods and identifiers to tell other network stack levels what standard protocol is being transported.

Sure! They are the developer. If it is non standard why would they even bother eh? Look at Microsoft, they are the epitome of proprietary.

You just don't seem able to defend your claim that Appletalk is not a networking standard. You just come up with a bunch of Dan Ratherian excuses "it a lie but i'll tell it anyway"

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
"Bruce" wrote in message

doing
READ and you will see that it was I who pointed that out after the initial reference to PPP in this thread.

Introducing another red herring won't help your argument ... stick to the subject.

AppleTalk is a set of proprietary network protocols ... it is not, as I have repeatedly stated, an industry "standard".

Well, his grammar is better than yours, but I agree you that you are obstinately failing to recognize the truth of the matter.
--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 11/06/04
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Tue, 1 Mar 2005 06:34:04 -0700, Swingman wrote

You don't seem to grasp that PPP can both transport TCP/IP and be transported over TCP/IP.

Yeah right, you still are avoiding my initial question.

Suffering from CRS???? you said it's not a networking standard.

yeah right! You seem to agree with the 'Wrecks esteemed wordsmith Mr. Watson that Excel is an industry standard (de-facto, which I would agree) but you are based against AppleTalk??? You must have tried to network one too many MS systems..
So, again...

>"networking standard" in the industry is as laughable as it is ridiculous.
>(And that is a reality based FACT, which only a fool would argue against.) Care to explain????

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
"Bruce" wrote in message

against.)
Sure thing, Bruce. Don't mind explaining that at all ... it means that since you're arguing against the fact that AppleTalk is not an industry standard, you qualify as a fool. Now go play somewhere else where you may have a chance to convince someone it is ... you've failed miserably here.
--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 11/06/04
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Tue, 1 Mar 2005 20:49:50 -0700, Swingman wrote

Hmmm. So buy this I take it that you can't back up your statement. You've certainly avoided it well.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
You are probably thinking of IEEE who designates worldwide standards. e.g. IEEE 802.3 more commonly known as Ethernet. The numerical specification refers to the date which this worldwide networking specification was adopted - February, 1980 - almost a quarter century! (the part to the left of the decimal refers to topology).
Mark

with
a
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Mark wrote:

...
You are probably thinking of ISO. IEEE is an American organization only. While some IEEE standards may have been adopted as ISO standards, IEEE is not a world standards organization.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

No. The IETF is the Internet Engineering Task Force. They are the ones responsible for numbering RFC's, which specify how the Internet should operate.
RFC's are Request For Comments, and the standards are described in # RFC 1123 - Requirements for Internet Hosts - Application and Support # RFC 1122 - Requirements for Internet Hosts - Communication Layers
It's filled with words such as SHOULD, MAY and MUST.
--
Sending unsolicited commercial e-mail to this account incurs a fee of
$500 per message, and acknowledges the legality of this contract.
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

... and in the case of DRDOS, outright sabotage.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I'm not so sure about a standard OS, but I am pretty sure we'd have a standard set of API's and a standard binary format. (Or at least OS's that tolerated multiple API's and binary formats)
-Mike
--
http://www.mschaef.com

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
"MSCHAEF.COM" wrote in message

Rarely is anything all bad or all good. The point is that we inarguably have, for better or worse, like it or not, what amounts to a "standard" for which programmers can write and be assured that their code will run on most of the personal computers in the world, thereby greatly increasing chances of success; and driver standards that pretty well insure OS, hardware, and peripheral compatibility for those personal computers.
The latter should be readily obvious to anyone who lived through the times when that was not the case, but is a fact that seems to be ignored in favor of the knee-jerk bashing mentality.
I am far from being an apologist for any big corporation, but as I said, rarely is anything all bad, as most of the knee-jerk, perspective challenged bashers would have you believe.
--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 11/06/04
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Unix.
--

-Mike-
snipped-for-privacy@alltel.net
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Thirty years later! Damn, you guys are really fanatics about lin/u/nix.
I liked the OS2 that I had on a bunch of monitors at the prisons, myself.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Ehh...pays well, y'know?

Good point. There are still ATMs running OS/2 out there.
Dave Hinz
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Ummmm... Unix is "standard" ????
I been in this computer crapolla for quite a few years myself and which of the just over 200 variants of Unix is the "standard version" ????
and while I'm at it.... just when did a collection of utility programs called Windows get to be a OS ???
Mike Marlow wrote:

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Sure.

They all are. A _good_ Unix sysadmin can speak to any of them with a minimum of retraining between. And nearly all of the current flavors of unix can be used to build the same tools from the same sourcecode.

When it went from being the shell to being the kernel, which would be when they went from the win95/98/98SE/ME world to the WinNT/win2K/winXP/win2003 world, I think.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

All the _good_ Unix sysadmins I know are religious bigots who won't dirty their hands with BSD / anything other than BSD. And as for the HP-UX / Solaris / SGI freakiness.
There's more to it than just DeadRat vs. Suse vs. Debian
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload


Hm, you must know a different group of Unix guys than I do. Yeah, there are the prima-donnas who will only work on their favorite whatever, but that's a good thing to screen out in job interviews.
I mean, VI or EMACS, yeah, but if they recoil at hearing FreeBSD and do the "I only do OPENBSD, thank you very much!" kind of thing, then, well, the interview is effectively over. If the response is "Well, I've done OpenBSD and NetBSD, and I understand that Free differs in this, that, and another way, but I know where the man pages are", then sure.

Ehhh... it's all the same enough. I'm mostly Sun these days, but have done a ton of all of 'em. Just fire up the Unix Rosetta Stone when I forget what something is called or where it is, or use the Purple Book, and we're good to go.

I've got two of the three of those in production too. Right tool for the right job, y'know?
Dave Hinz
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Pat Barber wrote:

I'd be willing to go with any/all for which I can write, compile, link, and run programs in C89 (with POSIX.1 extensions), though a C99 [ISO/IEC 9899:1999(E)] compiler would be nice...

Now be fair -- *nix isn't very far from being a collection of utilities itself (although there's worlds of difference in quality.)
--
Morris Dovey
DeSoto Solar
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.