Nah. I deal with four different factories in Shanghai and send Excel
sheets back and forth all the time, without a problem.
Ya know why? Because it is the "defacto standard" for those who do
business with the West.
tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet (real email)
How did you end up with that moniker, Tawm? Last I knew, Col. Patterson
booted his butt out of National Cash Register when he got some crazy idea
about punching holes in paper cards. Then again, mid 60's at some kind of
company picnic in Dayton, one guy said "It used to be IBM, but now it's just
BM, because I left".
OK, my friend, let's look at just whose "viewpoints" are indeed "shallow".
We'll take them one by one, from your very first mistake: posting about
something of which you obviously have only limited knowledge, a point which
you indeed prove.
For someone who supposedly "attended meetings" on USB (which YOU brought up
and tried to shoehorn into context), you appear to have slept through most
MSFT was only a small part of the consortium that brought USB into being.
Try Compaq, NEC, Northern Telecom, IBM, Intel and Digital as "CO-DEVELOPERS"
of the USB protocol as we know it today, NOT as you suggest something MSFT
"tried to force down the throat ..." (sic).
(That is an actual, and inarguable, FACT!)
With regard to "Apple" and networking ... to suggest that AppleTalk is a
"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.)
But, where you really give yourself away is with your comments regarding
"DHCP" and "DNS":
DHCP is a protocol for IP NETWORKS and was created by the Internet
Engineering Task Force (IETF), the body responsible for Internet protocols,
(That, again, is an inarguable FACT!)
The fact that Apple talk does not use DHCP is a red herring introduced by
you, as AppleTalk is NOT an ip network! (see above)
(Also an inarguable FACT!)
And without DNS, even a Apple/ Mac couldn't get anywhere on the Internet
without knowing the ip address of every machine it wanted to visit.
(Another, absolutely inarguable, FACT!)
Now, as I originally indicated .. judging from the factual errors in your
original diatribe, I'd say your "scars" are solely a figment of your
imagination, and well you should have been "sheepish", as you admitted, for
even stepping up on the soapbox with that kind of misinformation.
It is very easy to sleep through technical meetings where the
discussion is irrelevant because the answers are dictated in the back
room through force of the MDA.
What I cited, had you read my response, was that MS and Intel forced
PC suppliers to ship USB hardware before the technology was finished
or proven. A tremendous number of PC mfr service calls (in fact a
couple of class action lawsuits) were generated in 1995 through 1998
simply because the equipment had this USB feature that no one could
use. That is a fact.
The fact is that USB is an industry consortium, set up by MS and
Intel, with very restricted rules regarding Intellectual Property (IP)
and process that prevented anyone who had significant IP to contribute
from participating without giving away the family jewels. In fact IBM
did not participate in the consortium, despite claims in the spec to
the contrary, for precisely this reason. That is a fact. There are
numerous other examples of this practice.
You will find that the MO is for MS to avoid participation in real
standards committees where the implementation is not guaranteed and
subject to public debate and, instead, takes one of two paths: either
publish the spec as a Windows specification - take it or leave it (and
if the industry is real lucky the specification accurately represents
their implementation which is rare), or set up a consortium where the
outcome is controlled and gives the appearance of a democratic
It is also a false argument since I never said AppleTalk is a
networking standard. I said that Apple shipped the ability to network
between devices without hassle long before MS ever did, using IETF
standards or otherwise. Maybe if you read what I said rather than
what you think I said we would actually get somewhere with this
<snip of more meaningless misinterpretation of what I said>
Perhaps if you had known more about what you were attempting to say, and had
been more factual in presenting it, the outcome would have been different
As it is, _you_ introduced every single word of the irrelevant BS about
"AppleTalk", "USB", "DHCP", and "DNS" into the discussion, yet you remain
unable to defend a word of it.
End of story.
PPP being basically an "encapsulation" protocol for point to point serial
communication, for configuring TCP/IP over PPP, and being "apples and
oranges" when it comes to AppleTalk network layer protocol, I am not sure
what your point is, nor what the relevance is, with regard to the statement
You're right about that, but more in a _local_ sense ... and they're
getting fewer all the time, thanks to the "mother of all networks", which
certainly has specific "standards" that dictate that 'if your local network
wants to play, you do it this way'.
IOW, disparate networking protocols, desiring to communicate over the global
Internet, better follow the "networking standards" found in the Internet
Protocol Standards Index.
So, in effect, the contention that there is no "networking standard" today
is arguably nearsighted in a global sense.
On Sat, 19 Feb 2005 09:05:26 -0700, Swingman wrote
Seem they are interested in "internet" standards.
Internet is a network, a network is not necessarily an internet.
I can network all sorts of devices with products from a wide range of
vendors. Are they capable of being hooked up to the internet? probably not
unless I adhere to internet standards. Are they still a network standard?
On Sat, 19 Feb 2005 22:17:33 -0700, Swingman wrote
Hmmm, I googled "disparate" and got no hits. I jumped in on your statement
that Appletalk (ATCP) is not a standard when even the IETF has a working
group dedicated to it.
Of course it is outdated, but seeing how millions of machines and devices
worked with it for years as a network, calling it rediculous is akin to
calling RS232 ridiculous.
>>to suggest that AppleTalk is a
> > "networking standard" in the industry is as laughable as it is
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.