Do you only do those things you know how to do then?
Ah. So, not a 'pioneer' at any level?
When I was at secondary school in woodwork classes we were given the
choice of making book-ends or a bathroom cabinet. Because I didn't
read (for fun) I didn't need any book-ends and because I didn't own a
bathroom I didn't want a bathroom cabinet either, what I didn't have
but did want was a boat. My teacher asked him if I had ever built a
boat before and I said I had not. Then he asked how I knew I was able
to built one and I wouldn't know till I tried. So, I built the boat
(and still have it) because I knew I had the basic skills I needed to
do something I had never done before. Same with building the kitcar
after doing all the bits individually on different vehicles over the
So I did something I had never done before with little in the way of
guidance from anyone and by just following some basic plans and
general building guideline (like which glue was best and how to bend
timber without a steambox etc).
My point was that much of what I had to do was for me and at that
time, 'trial and error' as such, because that principal doesn't
stipulate the ratio of error to trial. If you read Johns TV Box Wiki
you will see he made mistakes because he hadn't made that actual thing
before, even though he had done most of the processes before. That was
the 'error' in 'trial and error'.
Not 'again', 'exactly'. So, you have to look at the *typical* userbase
for most desktop OS's and then consider just how much involvement and
'learning' you might consider to be a minimum requirement. My point
was that it *is* (unquestionably) easier to lean something that you
can explore than something that heads more traditional study.
But that is just the OS itself, there is nothing stopping people
writing other modules like drivers and applications.
But why should it be so different re user-administration, especially
in 2017? The answer is 'it shouldn't' and if all the people working on
Linux stuff, doing their own thing, forking distros every which way,
spent time refining the admin GUI to be more, 'GUI' then maybe my list
could include Linux?
And it is my prediction that one day it might, making any counter
argument pretty mute?
Something that can be intuitively explored is easier to lean than
something that can't.
And most wouldn't want to (including me), ever.
I am talking about just administering the OS from an admin-users POV.
So, that's not developer or end user just using what they are given
with it all working (as well as it can be).
So I am talking people like me who might like to be able to fix more
of the many things that often don't work on Linux with hardware OOTB
that work with Windows OOTB because in most cases there is official
support for Windows from the hardware manufacturers and software
Linux is currently still that harsh square peg in the generally
friendly round hole that is Windows (OSX / Android) world.
Slowly though the square is being rounded (as even I have seen over a
good few years now from not being able to install Linux and even get
it working, installing it and having some things working (wired
Ethernet if not Wireless, some video display rather than none) to it
generally working as long as you are a bit lucky).
My point is that *my* low level skills re Linux admin haven't really
improved yet my ability to get to a fully working (basic) machine has.
It seems that many of the Linux zealots can't or don't want to
acknowledge the weakness at this level and simply think that making
people have to do something (learn how to use the OS at a lower level)
is a realistic / practical solution to the issue, rather than simply
bringing Linux up to speed in 2017. ;-(
Cheers, T i m
Of course, but unless you are skilled / trained / experienced or just
naturally good at something, for many there will be an element of
'trial and error' involved.
Nowhere is this more relevant than here in a d-i-y group where many
solutions are no more than ideas or guesstimations.
"I've not tried this myself but have you tried doing ... "
Well quite ... so, one assumes if what you are attempting isn't
something experienced or skilled at, there will be an element of
'exploration' in it's application? We call that 'trial and error'. ;-)
No, but 'trial and error' isn't a definitive thing is it. My point was
I wasn't *fully* conversant with all the steps or the processes
required that might be involved.
It's exactly the same as my previous admin exposure to all the OS /
NOS's I listed and how *none* of them gave me much in the way of
experience when it comes to Linux. I can't think of any other similar
experience where doing something similar put me in such an unfamiliar
Ah, you are talking then of those who *want* to take on a new hobby or
interest versus those (like me) who are only doing what we have to do
because of 'needs must'.
Statement: I have no interested *whatsoever* in any OS.
An OS to me is a means to an end and should, under ideal
circumstances, be completely transparent. In the same way I maintain
my own vehicles and domestic appliances but I don't do so because I
*want* to, but because I often find it more convenient, cheaper and
with a better outcome, than getting someone else to do it.
No they can't, well, not at the level I am talking about and for the
people I'm talking about.
Example. Yesterday a mate mentioned a netbook that his Mrs had bought
for a grandkid a while ago had been mainly left unused because it was
very slow / not working properly. So I brought it home and have been
playing with it inbetween other stuff. So far I have installed loads
of updates, run various AV / malware scans etc etc but am left with
some ~30% background CPU utilisation. I have updated the video driver
and checked for updates for the BIOS and other hardware drivers and
I've done so without going anywhere near the CLI. Even if I was to
screw say the video driver up the chances are I could fix it via some
GUI based Safe Mode etc.
Because that is what people want and that is the purpose of a desktop
OS isn't it, to serve people?
And the Linux distros don't? And at least any changes made by MS /
Apple / Google are done because of some central / organised decision,
not because several people in several sheds who in general aren't
talking to each other, thought (personally) something would be a good
idea? Look at Canonical forcing Unity on all Ubuntu users, even those
*not* using portable devices and touch screens and then insisting it
would stay like that for good. Now I understand they are now going to
drop Unity and go to something else? And what of all the 'marmite'
alternative Linux subsystems that are being argued about within the
Well, that counters your entire argument doesn't it?
Agreed. And the point is that you don't generally need to write your
own driver for hardware under Windows because the manufacturers know
that they really need to supply drivers for their hardware to be
sellable to 80% of the market.
I don't think we do, or if we do then may I suggest you don't often
mix with real people trying to manage both Linux or Windows PC's?
If Linux was comparable to Windows (or OSX / Android) for the
admin-user to manage then surely someone who has worked in OT support
and building PC's and networks for over 30 years would have less
trouble with Linux eh? Don't you think if I could install Linux as
easily as I can install and then make-work with all my hardware (as
easily as I generally can with Windows) I would? The answer to that id
you are still confused is 'Of course I would'. Who wouldn't want
something that was current, 'more secure' and FREE, if it allowed them
to do all they want just as easily as they could on something that
wasn't all those things?
Nor have I, so much and these days' but I'm not even / really talking
about the straight installation on 'Linux friendly' (known or
otherwise) hardware. I'm talking about the many million people who
take their fully functioning Linux laptop and then try to get it to
batch scan from their network printer, or access the iTunes store, or
upgrade the BIOS or interface with their GPS or many many other
*Exactly*, but said progress is something that few Linux zealots seem
to think is required, until it happens then they boast about it when
in many cases it's no more than Linux catching up with the likes of
'Look at all the games we can run on Linux under Steam!' ...Yeah,
great, only 10 years after you could run all the games on Steam on
Windows but better late than never eh? ;-)
By comparison, more reasonable admin's who by definition (of
reasonable) will use whatever OS best suits them or the needs at the
time, do see / admit the limitations of all the OS's and will
willingly concede when something is wrong. Like, very few admin-users
will say they prefer W8.1 over say W7 or see any real advantage
running W10 over 7.
So, in an effort to see if this ~20% (currently) background CPU
utilisation is coming from on this Atom powered HP netbook, I'm now
going to see if I can boot it from my Linux Mint boot USB stick and
then if I can and it actually runs, see if I can find and load a
system monitor and see what Linux thinks of it?
There is a possibility that say Mint Mate 32 bit would run better on
this 2GB 1.6Mhz dual core atom than W10 64 bit but even if it did, I
understand the lad needs MS Office for school ... ;-(
Cheers, T i m
OK. But there's a limit to the amount of "trial-and-error" I am happy
It's difficult to think of a good analogy for Operating Systems. But
there are major differences between them. It's not ideal, but it's
the way it is. For my work I've needed to learn (in depth) about
several operating systems so I guess I am not a typical user.
But, whatever OS it runs, there must be a way of checking what is
gobbling CPU and GIYF ;-)
FWIW: I use Ubuntu but have not installed Unity.
I don;t think so.
But some hardware manufacturers stop support for some products. For
example I had a scanner that the manufacturer stopped providing
drivers beyond XP.
I think I mix with some real people ;-)
I'm not sure I follow this entirely. I find Linux works with most
hardware, as well as Windows does.
Not all these things are trivial to do with Windows either.
Windows has become a "standard" and hence gets the games.
IMHO Win8.1 is better than W7 for performance. As long as you hide
the awful default UI.
My instinct would be that Linux would run better on a low-end system
like this. If you lad needs an Office application then why not try
LibreOffice? I can create/read all MS office files.
Yes, I'm afraid I'll have to do this, but it will necessitate finding
some undisturbed time with access to the room the recorder is in.
Somehow, every single device we have here responds differently in the
way it has to be set up - even the Sony TV is different from the (older)
Sony recorder that we have under the telly as a standby device.
I was really wondering if anyone else with a Humax 2000T had noticed a
change in its behaviour in the last few weeks. It never used to program
2 or 3 instances of the same programme simultaneously on different
channels. This seems to happen whether or not the broadcasts are at the
same or different times.
If someone else has one of these recorders that doesn't do this then
I'll have to try to find what button I've pressed that I shouldn't.
That's Storeton or Moel-y-Parc. I had the exact same problem
Older stuff will assign channels from both transmitters, this is what
you're seeing. Newer stuff will either put the duplicates up in channel
800+ or ask you which transmitter you want to use.
I think you're probably getting better reception because of the good
weather, and the Humax is now able to detect the extra transmitter and
is adding the channels from that when it tunes.
I fixed it two ways for different kit:
1) for a Topfield PVR, I put an 18dB attenuator in line with the aerial
cable. This worked to filter out the weaker signal from Moel-y-parc such
that Winter Hill was the only transmitter detected
2) for another device, I ignored the auto-tuner and manually added the
channels using the information found at
(='.'=) "Between two evils, I always pick
Yes, Storeton in front of the aerial and Moel-y-Parc aimed at the back.
I am fairly sure that I remember that when planning permission was
finally granted for Storeton, one condition was that it would not relay
Welsh transmissions, but I haven't been able to find any record of the
It has put one of the Welsh transmissions on 801, but the other is in
the normal list. It hasn't been a problem juggling the channels round
so that BBC1NW is 1, BBC2 is 2 and so on.
It never used to record anything but the channel and programme that it
was programmed for, but now it seems to want to record the programme
selected plus the same programme on a different channel and from a
different transmitter. That's why it would be helpful if anyone with a
similar Humax and multiple channels with the same programme could
confirm it hasn't happened to them.
Thanks, When I have full access to the TV, I'll fiddle around.
I do know of one local elderly lady who has reverted totally from TV to
radio, and most others round here have moved from Freeview to Freesat.
I do have a biggish dish mounted on the garage but will probably now
never embark on my plan of steering it by stepper motors interfaced with
a PC that would log satellite positions. That once seemed like a good
idea, but I never got round to investigating and re-purposing the old
industrial printers' motors.
I had the same problem despite the aerial pointing straight at Winter
Hill with Moel-y-Parc behind. They're both horizontally polarised,
Maybe you'd benefit from a more directional aerial - one that is more
capable of rejecting the unwanted signal from Moel. There's an aerial
fitter that contributes to these groups, he may chip in.
You should also try posting to uk.tech.digital-tv. There's a bunch of
very knowledgeable and helpful people there.
I think you need to delete the duplicate channels from the channel list
Why do it yourself when there are commercial motorised dishes widely
available, plus support in the STBs for finding satellites? Google
(='.'=) "Between two evils, I always pick
As is the Welsh relay from Storeton which is in a straight line from
Winter Hill to here. The English relay which Storeton was originally
built to provide is about a quarter of the power, vertically polarised
and points the other way, so that is fine.
I did post there some years ago. The lady with the problem with her set
top box that I asked about preferred to give up TV altogether rather
than spend any money or look at it further. She remains happy with radio
Hmmm. DiSEqC looks interesting, but the person who wanted to watch
different satellites has now left the area, so my incentive has gone.
I have this elderly dish, but I was never sure that the arc it followed
was accurate. I even brought in some "professionals" but they couldn't
improve on what I'd achieved.
So, the mad idea was to build a new drive assembly using stepper motors
and set it mapping the sky and recording repeatable positions where it
found satellites, then a manual revisit to them all to work out what
they were and perhaps even watch something.
But, as often happens, I ran out of time and enthusiasm, the receiver
became obsolete, and the replacement receiver, LNB's and the printers
containing the motors have just gathered dust ever since.
Just one more example in my rich pattern of failed useless-but-fun
projects. I really must clear out the shed.
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.