1: Round [7 87.50%] û
2: Flat [1 12.50%] û
1: Round [7 87.50%] û
2: Flat [1 12.50%] û
Seriously?
What do you mean by "Seriously?"? Was it toward the fact there was even a poll on the subject, or the fact that there was any votes toward the "Flat" option?
Re: The Earth is:
By: Mr. Cool to (null) on Sun May 27 2018 01:13 pm
1: Round [7 87.50%] û
2: Flat [1 12.50%] û
Seriously?
Re: The Earth is:
By: Jagossel to Nightfox on Tue May 29 2018 02:22 pm
What do you mean by "Seriously?"? Was it toward the fact there was even a poll on the subject, or the fact that there was any votes toward the "Flat" option?
I've heard about this debate coming up recently, but I'm surprised there is such a debate in this day & age.. Unless this poll is just for fun..
1: Round [7 87.50%] û
2: Flat [1 12.50%] û
Seriously?
Nightfox wrote to Jagossel <=-
I've heard about this debate coming up recently, but I'm surprised
there is such a debate in this day & age.. Unless this poll is just
for fun..
I've heard about this debate coming up recently, but I'm surprised
there is such a debate in this day & age.. Unless this poll is just
for fun..
you have never seen a true picture of the planet earth. they are all admitedly fakes by nasa.
most 'facts' that globe believers cling to have been debunked.
Yes, one wonders how anyone can believe the Earth is flat (unless _very_ isolated). I wonder how those satellites that I've worked on ham radio and seen with my own eyes got around a flat Earth. ;) I do admit the Flat Earthers do have some good ideas, we'd all live in the same time zone and share the same seasons! :D
for fun..
Yes, one wonders how anyone can believe the Earth is flat (unless _very_ isolated). I wonder how those satellites that I've worked on ham radio and seen with my own eyes got around a flat Earth. ;) I do admit the Flat Earthers do have some good ideas, we'd all live in the same time zone and share the same seasons! :D
Re: The Earth is:
By: MRO to Nightfox on Tue May 29 2018 04:13 pm
I've heard about this debate coming up recently, but I'm surprised
there is such a debate in this day & age.. Unless this poll is just
for fun..
This flat earth joke really isn't that funny anymore..
most 'facts' that globe believers cling to have been debunked.
you have never seen a true picture of the planet earth. they are all admitedly fakes by nasa.
What do you mean by "Seriously?"? Was it toward the fact there was even poll on the subject, or the fact that there was any votes toward the "Flat" option?
I've heard about this debate coming up recently, but I'm surprised there is such a debate in this day & age.. Unless this poll is just for fun..
I've heard about this debate coming up recently, but I'm surprised there is such a debate in this day & age.. Unless this poll is just for fun..
Yes, one wonders how anyone can believe the Earth is flat (unless _very_ isolated). I wonder how those satellites that I've worked on ham radio and seen with my own eyes got around a flat Earth. ;) I do admit the Flat Earth do have some good ideas, we'd all live in the same time zone and share the s seasons! :D
Nightfox wrote to Vk3jed <=-
Exactly.. Or why we can fly/sail around the world if the earth is
flat. Or why we see different stars in the northern and southern hemispheres if the earth is flat. I've also heard that some Flat
Earthers believe gravity isn't real, and the earth is constantly accelerating upward at 9.8m/s per second. If that's true, then we must
be going pretty fast by now, probably faster than the speed of light, which I thought was theoretically impossible.. I guess we were wrong about that whole light speed thing, right? ;)
MRO wrote to Vk3jed <=-
since man has existed, they have been told things about the natural
order and believed it without questioning.
you have to question.
It is either square or rectangle take your pick.
I knew about this debate about a year ago (I believe), and it was discussed on some website Now You See TV. I've heard that the flat-eathers don't truely believe it's flat, just more like an oval.
Earthers believe gravity isn't real, and the earth is constantly
accelerating upward at 9.8m/s per second. If that's true, then we
must be going pretty fast by now, probably faster than the speed of
light, which I thought was theoretically impossible.. I guess we
No, we wouldn't exceed the speed of light, but we would be at highly relativistic velicities by now, and we'd be bombarded by high energy radiation and projectiles (basically everything at "rest"), to the point there's be nothing left by now. :) Oh, and chances are the Universe has
most 'facts' that globe believers cling to have been debunked.
you have never seen a true picture of the planet earth. they are
all admitedly fakes by nasa.
why is that?
since man has existed, they have been told things about the natural order and >believed it without questioning.
you have to question.
The one point that I distinctly remember someone saying that proves that Earth is round without going out to space is to be on a ship, sailing the seas. If the person sailing on a ship takes a telescope and looks straight ahead, they would see a ship in the distance, but only the top of the ship and the sea below it.
since man has existed, they have been told things about the natural order and believed it without questioning.
you have to question.
Yes, when there's evidence to call things in to question. Not because you want to make a silly, unsubstantiated argumented.
Re: The Earth is:
By: MRO to Nightfox on Tue May 29 2018 04:13 pm
most 'facts' that globe believers cling to have been debunked.
Can you show anything about how such facts have been debunked? I've read through some of those and seen some videos and not really sure they are debunking anything.. It's the flat-earth beliefs that have been debunked many times.
Re: The Earth is:
By: MRO to Nightfox on Wed May 30 2018 12:09 am
you have never seen a true picture of the planet earth. they are MR>> all admitedly fakes by nasa.
why is that?
When has Nasa ever admitted all their pictures of the earth are fake?
Jagossel wrote to Vk3jed <=-
The one point that I distinctly remember someone saying that proves
that Earth is round without going out to space is to be on a ship,
sailing the seas. If the person sailing on a ship takes a telescope and looks straight ahead, they would see a ship in the distance, but only
the top of the ship and the sea below it.
Nightfox wrote to Vk3jed <=-
:) If the earth is accellerating upward, and our sky remains the same, that also means that the sun, moon, and stars that we see would also
have to be accelerating in the same direction, I'd think...
MRO wrote to Vk3jed <=-
a lot of the 'proof' is wrong. and it's not questioned. it's very
strange. same with the moon landing. they taped over the moon landing tapes because they needed to reuse them? that's nuts! they lost the telematry data? they said they couldnt land on the moon if they wanted
to. a guy went into nasa shooting a documentary and nasa staff said
this stuff.
also nasa made this foil that is highly resistant to fire and heat....
but firemen arent using it?
since man has existed, they have been told things about the natural
order and believed it without questioning.
you have to question.
The first to say it was round were questioning what they were told... that the Earth was flat, the Sun revolved around the Earth, etc.
The one point that I distinctly remember someone saying that proves
that Earth is round without going out to space is to be on a ship,
sailing the seas. If the person sailing on a ship takes a telescope
and looks straight ahead, they would see a ship in the distance, but
only the top of the ship and the sea below it.
they got the exact distance and then shot a pic to prove that wasnt true
The one point that I distinctly remember someone saying that proves that Earth is round without going out to space is to be on a ship, sailing the seas. If the person sailing on a ship takes a telescope and looks straigh ahead, they would see a ship in the distance, but only the top of the shi and the sea below it.
they got the exact distance and then shot a pic to prove that wasnt true
you have never seen a true picture of the planet earth. they are
all admitedly fakes by nasa.
why is that?
When has Nasa ever admitted all their pictures of the earth are fake?
When has Nasa ever admitted all their pictures of the earth are
fake?
I work for NASA. Our pictures are totally fake.....
Ok, so I don't work for NASA. But, I do have some fake photos....of something, somewhere.
Re: Re: The Earth is:
By: MRO to Jagossel on Wed May 30 2018 20:49:20
The one point that I distinctly remember someone saying that proves
that Earth is round without going out to space is to be on a ship,
sailing the seas. If the person sailing on a ship takes a telescope
and looks straigh ahead, they would see a ship in the distance, but
only the top of the shi and the sea below it.
they got the exact distance and then shot a pic to prove that wasnt
true
They who?
One thing I have heard is that NASA touches up their photos, but only to make things more clear, not to make them totally fake. I've heard their touch-ups may include color enhancements, or stitching together multiple photos of the earth because the telescope was not far enough away to get a single complete photo.
NASA has a vested interest in adhering to scientific principles. For one thing, other countries cooperate with us on certain things space related. We don't do it all alone. If we developed that kind of reputation, it would hurt us in the long run. As for the enhancements, I know some of that is necessary due to the limitations of technology.
I found it interesting to know that NASA used AMIGA computers back in the day for telemetry data (I think it was). I'm not sure if I heard that on this echo or a news article. I've never been an AMIGA user, but I've had some interest in vintage computing as of late. It's interesting to me what NASA was able to do with very limited computing power back in the day.
and looks straigh ahead, they would see a ship in the distance, but
only the top of the shi and the sea below it.
they got the exact distance and then shot a pic to prove that wasnt
true
They who?
NASA? *scratches head*
Jagossel wrote to Vk3jed <=-
The one point that I distinctly remember someone saying that proves that Earth is round without going out to space is to be on a ship, sailing the seas. If the person sailing on a ship takes a telescope and looks straight ahead, they would see a ship in the distance, but only the top of the ship and the sea below it.
Yeah ships are a good way of showing a round Earth without leaving the ground (or sea). :)
MRO wrote to Vk3jed <=-
a lot of the 'proof' is wrong. and it's not questioned. it's very strange. same with the moon landing. they taped over the moon landing tapes because they needed to reuse them? that's nuts! they lost the telematry data? they said they couldnt land on the moon if they wanted to. a guy went into nasa shooting a documentary and nasa staff said this stuff.
Umm, proof please (peer reviewed evidence). This sounds like what we call bullshit down here.
The first to say it was round were questioning what they were told... that the Earth was flat, the Sun revolved around the Earth, etc.
Exactly. The 'earth is flat' theory has already been debunked long ago by people who questioned things.
sailing the seas. If the person sailing on a ship takes a telescope
and looks straight ahead, they would see a ship in the distance, but
only the top of the ship and the sea below it.
they got the exact distance and then shot a pic to prove that wasnt true
When anyone tries to 'debunk' the reasons why we can prove the earth is spherical, it makes me question them and whether they really understand science or not.
There will always be skeptics, but I don't know if they really believe that the earth is flat. But, you never know. I could forgive them more for thinking that the Sun is yellow.
One thing I have heard is that NASA touches up their photos, but only to make things more clear, not to make them totally fake. I've heard their touch-ups may include color enhancements, or stitching together multiple photos of the earth because the telescope was not far enough away to get a single complete photo.
they got the exact distance and then shot a pic to prove that wasnt
true
They who?
NASA? *scratches head*
science is always wrong. a lot of the stuff i was told in school has been changed, rehashed and rewritten.
Yeah ships are a good way of showing a round Earth without leaving the
ground (or sea). :)
so why have they gone around the earth via latitude but not longitude?
Umm, proof please (peer reviewed evidence). This sounds like what we
call bullshit down here.
there's a video of it. he's in nasa.
i dont think they really believe the world is flat. they believe HOW we believe the world is a globe to be wrong. there's some strange things afoot
i dont think they really believe the world is flat. they believe HOW we believe the world is a globe to be wrong. there's some strange things afoot
Re: Re: The Earth is:
By: Zenobyte to Jagossel on Fri Jun 01 2018 12:34 am
and looks straigh ahead, they would see a ship in the distance,
but only the top of the shi and the sea below it.
they got the exact distance and then shot a pic to prove that wasnt
true
They who?
NASA? *scratches head*
I don't think NASA would have an interest in proving the earth is flat..
@VIA: VERT/DIGDIST
@MSGID: <5B1024EA.35427.dove_dove-gen@digitaldistortionbbs.com>
@REPLY: <5B0F2B0D.29307.dove-gen@capitolcityonline.net>
Re: Re: The Earth is:
By: Dumas Walker to MRO on Wed May 30 2018 06:47 pm
since man has existed, they have been told things about the natural
order and believed it without questioning.
you have to question.
The first to say it was round were questioning what they were told... that the Earth was flat, the Sun revolved around the Earth, etc.
Exactly. The 'earth is flat' theory has already been debunked long ago
by people who questioned things.
I never used Amiga either, but I find Amigas interesting. Their OS seemed pretty advanced back in the day. I've also heard Amiga had a product called Video Toaster, which was a video editing card and software that a lot of TV studios used for video editing and processing.
My point was that there were a lot "they" and "them" without the proper context of who "they" are. When I hear or see "they" or "them" used a lot without the specifics, it screams conspiracy theory. My wife pulls the same crap when she gets into conspiracy theories.
NASA? *scratches head*
My point was that there were a lot "they" and "them" without the proper context of who "they" are. When I hear or see "they" or "them" used a lot without the specifics, it screams conspiracy theory. My wife pulls the same crap when she gets into conspiracy theories.
science is always wrong. a lot of the stuff i was told in school has been changed, rehashed and rewritten.
That's what the process of science is. The process is to pose a question, test it to see if it's true or not. If it's not true, then try to pose
Re: Re: The Earth is:
By: MRO to Vk3jed on Thu May 31 2018 11:46 pm
Yeah ships are a good way of showing a round Earth without leaving the
ground (or sea). :)
so why have they gone around the earth via latitude but not longitude?
Perhaps because the distance between their source & destination was shorter via latitude?
Re: Re: The Earth is:
By: MRO to Vk3jed on Thu May 31 2018 11:47 pm
Umm, proof please (peer reviewed evidence). This sounds like what we
call bullshit down here.
there's a video of it. he's in nasa.
You keep mentioning this video. If you have an actual link to it, please post it. If not, then we can call BS.
Re: The Earth is:
By: MRO to Chai on Thu May 31 2018 11:49 pm
i dont think they really believe the world is flat. they believe HOW we believe the world is a globe to be wrong. there's some strange things afoot
There is the Flat Earth Society, and I have been hearing about Flat Earth conventions. Seems like if they didn't relaly believe the world is flat, they'd call it something different.
You can make up explanations all day long for why evidence might be wrong, but that doesn't mean there's actually a conspiracy going wrong.
here's a video, one of many
If our Earth was flat as the people (many many years ago) thought it was, even though they could see the Moon in the night sky was Round (as it still is today).
I remember when I was a youngster looking at the Moon and wondering about it and when I got older learning of the accomplishments of the Apollo flights to the Moon and back.
In the 1950's I went with a friend of mine to one of his friends to look through the friends 3.5 Inch Reflecting Telescope at several parts of the sky at night.
Iirc, I saw Jupiter, the Constellation Orion, and several other objects in the night sky.
Jupiter was Round as our Moon is.
All the other Planets that Astronomers have made photos of are Round.
Why not the Earth?
Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get you.
I saw a great web page capturing those TV conspiracy boards - you know, when the hero starts by putting up a map, then newspaper clippings, and pushpins, then connects the pins with yarn?
They showed a screen cap from the X files, with Mulder making a pretty impressive conspiracy board. In the background is a brown bag from "Conspiracy Yarn Barn".
just a person who did it.
would it matter if it was bill jones or fred smith
That's what the process of science is. The process is to pose a
question, test it to see if it's true or not. If it's not true, then
try to pose
it's just bullshit. we dont know as much as we think we know about anything. we arent curing diseases or making any breakthroughs.
things are believed for 50 years and then someone says believe this now, and people do.
Re: Re: The Earth is:
By: Zenobyte to Jagossel on Fri Jun 01 2018 00:34:50
they got the exact distance and then shot a pic to prove that wasnt
true
They who?
NASA? *scratches head*
My point was that there were a lot "they" and "them" without the proper context of who "they" are. When I hear or see "they" or "them" used a lot without the specifics, it screams conspiracy theory. My wife pulls the same crap when she gets into conspiracy theories.
-jag
so why have they gone around the earth via latitude but not longitude?
@MSGID: <5B11C4FB.29345.dove-gen@capitolcityonline.net>
@REPLY: <5B10CFA9.5026.dove-gen@bbses.info>
so why have they gone around the earth via latitude but not longitude?
Actually airplane flights sort of do. Because the Earth is rounded,
and we are in the Northern Hemisphere, it is shorter to fly at least slightly North of a straight line than it is to fly in a straight line.
IIRC, back in the early days of flight, there were pilots who flew from the US East Coast over the North Pole to get to Alaska because it was shorter than flying across the US/Southern Canada. They definately use longitude.
When anyone tries to 'debunk' the reasons why we can prove the earth is spherical, it makes me question them and whether they really understand science or not.
interesting to me what NASA was able to do with very limited computing
I never used Amiga either, but I find Amigas interesting. Their OS seemed pretty advanced back in the day. I've also heard Amiga had a product called Video Toaster, which was a video editing card and software that a lot of TV studios used for video editing and processing.
i'm not making up explainations. i'm saying a lot of what the public believes is wrong.
It would take a longer piece of string if someone wanted to wrap it Eastward around the Globe from Tokyo to San Francisco.
i'm not making up explainations. i'm saying a lot of what the public believes is wrong.
MRO wrote to Vk3jed <=-
Yeah ships are a good way of showing a round Earth without leaving the ground (or sea). :)
so why have they gone around the earth via latitude but not longitude?
MRO wrote to Vk3jed <=-
Umm, proof please (peer reviewed evidence). This sounds like what we call bullshit down here.
there's a video of it. he's in nasa.
Nightfox wrote to MRO <=-
You keep bringing up NASA faking photos, but people have believed the world to be round since long before NASA existed. Astronomers have observed that we can see different stars in the northern & southern
hemispheres, and the motion of the stars that we see adds up with the earth being a sphere. Also, Aristotle observed that the earth's shadow
on the moon is round. People have sailed and flown around the earth.
And just the other day, I was reading that the reason why flights tend
not to go over the artic/antartic is that the airlines would be
required to keep safety equipment for everyone to survive in those icy locations in case of a crash, and that would be cost-prohibitive.
You can make up explanations all day long for why evidence might be
wrong, but that doesn't mean there's actually a conspiracy going wrong.
Nightfox wrote to MRO <=-\
eliminated. That came from medical research and research into
vaccines. Science research has brought us a lot of things. Computers
are just one example of a result of scientific knowledge (computers require knowledge of various materials and how to make computer chips,
MRO wrote to Vk3jed <=-
Yeah ships are a good way of showing a round Earth without leaving the ground (or sea). :)
so why have they gone around the earth via latitude but not longitude?
Now that is totally nonsensical. All of the great voyages of discovery traveled in both latitude and longitude. In fact, that lead to the development of accurate ships' chronometers, so help determine longitude accurately for navigation purposes.
MRO wrote to Vk3jed <=-
Umm, proof please (peer reviewed evidence). This sounds like what we call bullshit down here.
there's a video of it. he's in nasa.
Peer reviewed? Or is it true because it's on the Internet?
Actually the ancient Greeks measured the diameter of the Earth (and got it surprosingly close to the value measured today), using a simple technique of measuring the difference in angle of the sun overhead at noon at 2 separated by 500 miles (IIRC). The timing was done so that the sun was directly overhead at one location, and the sun angle was measured at the other. That was somewhere around 2500 years ago.
And radio hams have put balloons up that gave circled the Earth multiple times, which have been tracked.
eliminated. That came from medical research and research into
vaccines. Science research has brought us a lot of things.
Computers are just one example of a result of scientific knowledge
(computers require knowledge of various materials and how to make
computer chips,
Not to mention quantum physics - semiconductors work because of quantum physics. And the quantum worls is bizarre by our familiar standards.
it. I know some people don't trust NASA, but there have been astronauts from other countries (not a part of NASA, I'm pretty sure) who have been up in orbit, on the International Space Station, and such. And as you've
Search on ebay.com : amiga 2500 nasa
Only 5000 USD :)
It's true... I had an Amiga 2000 back then and since some months again for my retro collection. Powerhouse machine with amazing video and sound capabilities.
I don't doubt that government & their agencies are probably hiding a lot of things from the public, but I doubt that the nature of the earth and space is one of them, and that they could even hide that. There are a lot of scientists and astrophysicists around the world, and I haven't heard of any of them ever saying the earth is flat.
Yep. And with continued research in quantum physics, high-tech companies are currently working on developing quantum computers.
MRO wrote to Vk3jed <=-
nobody went from the north pole, to the south pole, and all the way
around to north pole again.
Nightfox wrote to Vk3jed <=-
It's amazing what the ancient Greeks and others at the time had
learned. They already knew the earth was a sphere that long ago.
And radio hams have put balloons up that gave circled the Earth multiple times, which have been tracked.
That seems to me like a pretty solid way for people to know the earth
is round. I've been hearing about people who want to build their own
rocket to go up to space themselves to try to show the world that the earth is flat, but there have already been people who have been up in space and have seen it. I know some people don't trust NASA, but there have been astronauts from other countries (not a part of NASA, I'm
pretty sure) who have been up in orbit, on the International Space Station, and such. And as you've mentioned, the people who have
tracked the radio balloons circling the Earth.
Nightfox wrote to Vk3jed <=-
Yep. And with continued research in quantum physics, high-tech
companies are currently working on developing quantum computers.
MRO wrote to Nightfox <=-
notice that there is a delay and the crew is responding to the delay. OBAMA, on the other hand answers right away.
no delay for obama!
at the command center on earth there's a delay.
the space station has a delay.
no delay for obama. a few times he answers right away.
why is that?
Chai wrote to Nightfox <=-
I'm just wondering if they think the satellite landings were faked as well.
hes at nasa, he's in fucking nasa and he's talking about it.
and other guys at nasa are saying it too.
and you can see them talk about it inside nasa
internation space station, you say?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oXzkdYVzlcc
notice that there is a delay and the crew is responding to the delay.
OBAMA, on the other hand answers right away.
no delay for obama!
at the command center on earth there's a delay.
the space station has a delay.
no delay for obama. a few times he answers right away.
why is that?
MRO wrote to Vk3jed <=-
nobody went from the north pole, to the south pole, and all the way around to north pole again.
So? Your point?
Speed of light is finite. Actually, it doesn't take that long for communications DIRECTLY with ISS to get through (100mS or less). However, normal ISS comms goes via the TDRSS satellites, which are in a geostationary orbit. The signals have to go from the ground to the ISS (75000km round trip approx), trplies have to go back. That's a minimum of 1/2 a second. More, depending on the ground station configuration. Secondly, if the video
Re: Re: The Earth is:
By: MRO to Vk3jed on Sat Jun 02 2018 18:12:37
hes at nasa, he's in fucking nasa and he's talking about it.
and other guys at nasa are saying it too.
and you can see them talk about it inside nasa
Any one can claim they're from NASA without showing any proof; has the person and others shown physical proof that they are from NASA?
Anyone can claim to be something, scammers do it all the time.
at the command center on earth there's a delay.
the space station has a delay.
no delay for obama. a few times he answers right away.
why is that?
Because radio signals traveling through space takes a significant more time to travel further out from the receiver that's receiving the signals.
Re: The Earth is:
By: Mr. Cool to (null) on Sun May 27 2018 01:13 pm
1: Round [7 87.50%] û
2: Flat [1 12.50%] û
Seriously?
seen with my own eyes got around a flat Earth. ;) I do admit the Flat Earth do have some good ideas, we'd all live in the same time zone and share the s seasons! :D
1: Round [7 87.50%] û
2: Flat [1 12.50%] û
Seriously?
Nope, just thought I'd post it for fun. :)
from other countries (not a part of NASA, I'm pretty sure) who have been up in orbit, on the International Space Station, and such. And as you've mentioned, the people who have tracked the radio balloons circling the Earth.
Re: Re: The Earth is:
By: Nightfox to Vk3jed on Sat Jun 02 2018 17:15:52
from other countries (not a part of NASA, I'm pretty sure) who have been up in orbit, on the International Space Station, and such. And as you've mentioned, the people who have tracked the radio balloons circling the Earth.
The ISS broadcasts video looking down on the earth 24/7 via UStream.
MRO wrote to Vk3jed <=-
i posted my point 2 msgs back.
you split hairs and then i posted this.
MRO wrote to Vk3jed <=-
is this what wikipedia told you?
why is there a delay when the command on earth talked to the ISS, but
not with obama?
---
Mr. Cool wrote to Vk3jed <=-
It sounds like they tend to try to explain verious problems like that
with a "spotlight sun" that moves around the world, creating time zone,
or that the Earth is moving upward to explain why gravity doesn't pull
you toward the center of the planet. I guess they don't have a problem with the sun, moon, etc. being round though.
MRO wrote to Vk3jed <=-
i posted my point 2 msgs back.
you split hairs and then i posted this.
That wasn't a point, I debunked it No point you flogging a dead horse.
And besides, why _would_ someone want to travel around the Earth that way?
For 99.99999% of applications, there's no point, and it's particularly costly.
Don't need a conspiracy to explain that, just simple economics.
why is there a delay when the command on earth talked to the ISS, but not with obama?
---
Because of your perspective (being relatively close to Obama), your view of him is less affected by the various communication delays. Didn't you READ my explanation?
MRO wrote to Vk3jed <=-
That wasn't a point, I debunked it No point you flogging a dead horse.
no you didnt debunk it.
you split hairs and moved off of the exact fact i stated.
And besides, why _would_ someone want to travel around the Earth that way?
why do people climb mountains?
For 99.99999% of applications, there's no point, and it's particularly costly.
there's no point in anything.
Don't need a conspiracy to explain that, just simple economics.
it's your story, tell it how you wanna tell it. i just think it's weird that they flew around the world one way but not the other. and when
they flew around it they had no other reason than to say they did it.
MRO wrote to Vk3jed <=-
you're not reading what i was saying.
go back and read it.
That night I saw Saturn through that BIG Telescope, it was Round and had Rings around it and I never have forgot what that Golden Planet looked like that night.
I suppose we'll have to spend a few billion for another moon mission to find the flag and prove that we went there.
I'm just wondering if they think the satellite landings were faked as well.
I don't mean that sarcastically. I respect their point of view. I just don't see the logic.
I'm considering purchasing a Amiga for my little vintage stash. I just bought a Mac G5 on shopgoodwill.com for $10. I'm not sure what I'm
JavaScript that runs in a browser, so I've played with it a little. Part of me is sad that Commodore went defunct. I like the idea of having choices.
no delay for obama. a few times he answers right away.
why is that?
From our perspective on Earth, Obama was with us, so there's no delay between the observer (us) and Obama. However, we see the space side delayed by not only the delays in geting the signal up there, but also the delays coming back down.
If we were aboard the ISS instead, we would see the ISS side reply immediately, while the ground side would appear delayed.
I don't really either. We've also sent unmanned exploration vehicles to Mars and launched telescopes into space to send back photos..
the delays coming back down.
If we were aboard the ISS instead, we would see the ISS side reply immediately, while the ground side would appear delayed.
Straightforward and sensible answers for the win! :)
I don't really either. We've also sent unmanned exploration vehicles
to Mars and launched telescopes into space to send back photos..
but no photos of earth. strange isnt it.
Nightfox wrote to Vk3jed <=-
If we were aboard the ISS instead, we would see the ISS side reply immediately, while the ground side would appear delayed.
Straightforward and sensible answers for the win! :)
starwars is real, too
The ISS broadcasts video looking down on the earth 24/7 via UStream.starwars is real, too
I had thought about buying some vintage computers for a collection, but then I wonder where I'd put it all.. I've never been that much of a hoarder, and I'd rather have less stuff than more stuff. Makes it easier to move when I need to, and there's less stuff to clean and take care of.
Yeah, it seems like there's fewer choices for computer stuff these days. I remember when there were IBM-compatible PCs, Apple, Commodore/Amiga, Amstrad, and others.. And just on the IBM compatibles, there were several different operating systems: There were several companies making some form of DOS, and there was also Windows, OS/2, Linux, BeOS, and others. These days, it seems like there are only 3 main computer platforms: Windows, Apple/Mac, and Linux. I suppose mobile devices like iOS and Android could be considered major platforms too, since many people use those.
to Mars and launched telescopes into space to send back photos..
but no photos of earth. strange isnt it.
We have plenty of photos of earth.
Nightfox wrote to Vk3jed <=-
If we were aboard the ISS instead, we would see the ISS side reply immediately, while the ground side would appear delayed.
Straightforward and sensible answers for the win! :)
I'm glad someone thinks so. :)
Nightfox wrote to MRO on 06-04-18 16:32 <=-
Re: The Earth is:
By: MRO to Nightfox on Mon Jun 04 2018 05:04 pm
I don't really either. We've also sent unmanned exploration vehicles
to Mars and launched telescopes into space to send back photos..
but no photos of earth. strange isnt it.
We have plenty of photos of earth.
Re: Re: The Earth is:
By: Vk3jed to Nightfox on Tue Jun 05 2018 08:58 am
Nightfox wrote to Vk3jed <=-
If we were aboard the ISS instead, we would see the ISS side reply immediately, while the ground side would appear delayed.
Straightforward and sensible answers for the win! :)
I'm glad someone thinks so. :)
yeah but you read what i said wrong, so that's a big nope.
@VIA: VERT/DIGDIST
@MSGID: <5B1564BD.35514.dove_dove-gen@digitaldistortionbbs.com>
@REPLY: <5B137633.29580.dove-gen@bbs.electronicchicken.com>
Re: The Earth is:
By: Chai to Nightfox on Sun Jun 03 2018 01:01 am
I suppose we'll have to spend a few billion for another moon mission to find the flag and prove that we went there.
I'm just wondering if they think the satellite landings were faked as well.
I don't mean that sarcastically. I respect their point of view. I just don't see the logic.
I don't really either. We've also sent unmanned exploration vehicles
to Mars and launched telescopes into space to send back photos..
We have plenty of photos of earth.
LOL... why would we spend $1.5b on Hubble to take pics of the earth?
The U.S. Government has been very open about their Space Program, even revealing when there were failures in Project(s) that cost $$$$$$$.$$'s of Taxpayers money.
like i said before, they are photoshopped, fake photos. there's a guy at nasa who does it. you can see a video of him at nasa talking about it and watch him do it.
I wouldn't doubt that the US government might not be fully open about everything though. I heard that when the Roswell UFO was discovered, it was initially reported in newspapers that they had found a "flying saucer", but they soon changed their story to say it was a weather balloon.
I have also heard of some strange incidents with NASA live video feeds where something strange would start to happen or something odd starts to enter the field of view and then the video feed is immediately cut.
Nightfox wrote to Bill McGarrity on 06-05-18 12:50 <=-
Re: The Earth is:
By: Bill McGarrity to Nightfox on Tue Jun 05 2018 12:54 pm
We have plenty of photos of earth.
LOL... why would we spend $1.5b on Hubble to take pics of the earth?
eh.. I'm not sure we'd need Hubble to take pics of the earth.
Astronauts on space shuttle missions and on the International Space Station have taken pics of the Earth.
but no photos of earth. strange isnt it.
We have plenty of photos of earth.
LOL... why would we spend $1.5b on Hubble to take pics of the earth?
There is *so* much evidence that the earth is a sphere, I don't get how one could imagine otherwise. A flat earth would be interesting and raise a lot of new questions for astrophysicists everywhere - they would love for some mind-boggling new discovery like that, but it just ain't so. Oh well.
A lot of people believe in ghosts too.
NASA wanted to see if the long time (years) the Camera had been on the Moon had caused any changes to the electronic components.
eh.. I'm not sure we'd need Hubble to take pics of the earth. Astronauts on space shuttle missions and on the International Space Station have taken pics of the Earth.
How do you photoshop (or in this instance, adobe premiere) a 24/7 live feed of the planet Earth?
MRO wrote to Vk3jed <=-
yeah but you read what i said wrong, so that's a big nope.
MRO wrote to Nightfox <=-
but no photos of earth. strange isnt it.
Digital Man wrote to MRO <=-
Thousands of amateurs aim their antennas and tune their radio receivers (using, <gulp>, math) to receive real-time images from satellites in
orbit above the earth. These images show a very *spherical* planet and reflect the events (weather, fire, tides, lights, etc.) that those here
on the ground are observing first-hand.
To fake these systems and the resulting data would require a massive conspiracy of scientists and amateurs (civilians) and wide-spread ignorance of physics.
There is *so* much evidence that the earth is a sphere, I don't get how one could imagine otherwise. A flat earth would be interesting and
raise a lot of new questions for astrophysicists everywhere - they
would love for some mind-boggling new discovery like that, but it just ain't so. Oh well.
similar incidents, especially with the video feeds being cut. Not to sound Trekky, but with the universe being so vast, old, and constantly expanding the chances of our little spec of the galaxy being the only one capable of supporting life is slim to none in my book.
why cant we spin the motherfucker around and take one snapshot?
the rest of the shit is usually nasa artist renderings because dots that are light years away arent interesting.
A lot of people believe in ghosts too.
anything's possible.
i've seen some freaky shit and i'm drug free.
MRO wrote to Vk3jed <=-
yeah but you read what i said wrong, so that's a big nope.
And who knows what you're thinking. You're using some private bizarre interpretation, by the looks of it.
MRO wrote to Nightfox <=-
but no photos of earth. strange isnt it.
Even ham satellites have taken photos of Earth and sent them back.
similar incidents, especially with the video feeds being cut. Not to sound Trekky, but with the universe being so vast, old, and constantly expanding the chances of our little spec of the galaxy being the only
From what I've heard, they've gotten around that problem. If the camera/telescope is too close to take a complete picture, they can take multiple pictures and stitch them together.
They had a guy talking in that video that I'm not even sure is from NASA.
He says "It is Phtoshopped.. It has to be." If he really was someone from NASA, especially the guy who did that, I don't think he would say "It has to
You don't always believe Wikipedia, but do you always believe everything you see on YouTube?
Re: Re: The Earth is:
By: MRO to Digital Man on Tue Jun 05 2018 07:47 pm
A lot of people believe in ghosts too.
anything's possible.
i've seen some freaky shit and i'm drug free.
I've also experienced a couple odd things that I can't explain.. And our senses don't tell us everything about the world (our vision, for example, is only a portion of the total EM spectrum). We still don't know everything there is to know about the world around us.
Even ham satellites have taken photos of Earth and sent them back.
where are these ham sat pics?
i think violent or bad energy can get absorbed into a house. my mom helped a friend get a house that an old man died in. his family neglected him and left him alone in the house when he couldnt care for himself and he ended up falling and dying.
people that lived there swear they could see him way up in the attic window sometimes looking at them.
when i'd be at the house doing work for them on the
outside i could feel someone looking at me. everyone that went there felt creepy, and only a few knew what happened in that house.
just being in the house felt weird. you felt like you were being watched when you were alone.
some experts think that the universe is 'falling' and not expanding.
i dont think we know anything about the universe, though.
MRO wrote to Bill McGarrity on 06-05-18 19:45 <=-
Re: The Earth is:
By: Bill McGarrity to Nightfox on Tue Jun 05 2018 12:54 pm
but no photos of earth. strange isnt it.
We have plenty of photos of earth.
LOL... why would we spend $1.5b on Hubble to take pics of the earth?
why cant we spin the motherfucker around and take one snapshot?
the rest of the shit is usually nasa artist renderings because dots
that are light years away arent interesting.
Digital Man wrote to MRO on 06-05-18 23:14 <=-
Re: Re: The Earth is:
By: MRO to Vk3jed on Tue Jun 05 2018 11:01 pm
Even ham satellites have taken photos of Earth and sent them back.
where are these ham sat pics?
Here's one: reddit.com/r/RTLSDR/comments/8o1bzl/europe_seen_from_noaa19_hrpt_just_no w/
MRO wrote to Vk3jed <=-
no, you just didnt read what i was saying properly.
it's not a private bizarre interpretation.
MRO wrote to Vk3jed <=-
where are these ham sat pics?
Nightfox wrote to MRO <=-
I've also experienced a couple odd things that I can't explain.. And
our senses don't tell us everything about the world (our vision, for example, is only a portion of the total EM spectrum). We still don't
know everything there is to know about the world around us.
Digital Man wrote to MRO <=-
@VIA: VERT
Re: Re: The Earth is:
By: MRO to Vk3jed on Tue Jun 05 2018 11:01 pm
Even ham satellites have taken photos of Earth and sent them back.
where are these ham sat pics?
Here's one: reddit.com/r/RTLSDR/comments/8o1bzl/europe_seen_from_noaa19_hrpt_just_no w/
@VIA: VERT/DIGDIST
@MSGID: <5B16F378.35537.dove_dove-gen@digitaldistortionbbs.com>
@REPLY: <5B169840.29428.dove-gen@capitolcityonline.net>
Re: Re: The Earth is:
By: Ed Vance to Nightfox on Tue Jun 05 2018 08:39 am
The U.S. Government has been very open about their Space Program, even revealing when there were failures in Project(s) that cost $$$$$$$.$$'s of Taxpayers money.
I wouldn't doubt that the US government might not be fully open about everything though.
I heard that when the Roswell UFO was discovered,
it was initially reported in newspapers that they had found a "flying saucer", but they soon changed their story to say it was a weather balloon.
I have also heard of some strange incidents with NASA live video feeds where something strange would start to happen or something odd starts
to enter the field of view and then the video feed is immediately cut.
@VIA: VERT/BBSESINF
@MSGID: <5B173000.5133.dove-gen@bbses.info>
@REPLY: <5B169840.29428.dove-gen@capitolcityonline.net>
Re: Re: The Earth is:
By: Ed Vance to Nightfox on Tue Jun 05 2018 08:39 am
NASA wanted to see if the long time (years) the Camera had been on the Moon had caused any changes to the electronic components.
they're not THAT dumb. they have a good idea of what happened to it. perhaps a few people were curious.
Even ham satellites have taken photos of Earth and sent them back.
where are these ham sat pics?
Here's one: reddit.com/r/RTLSDR/comments/8o1bzl/europe_seen_from_noaa19_hrpt_just_now/
Re: Re: The Earth is:
By: MRO to all on Tue Jun 05 2018 11:03 pm
some experts think that the universe is 'falling' and not expanding.
Do you mean collapsing?
MRO wrote to Bill McGarrity on 06-05-18 19:45 <=-
Re: The Earth is:
By: Bill McGarrity to Nightfox on Tue Jun 05 2018 12:54 pm
but no photos of earth. strange isnt it.
We have plenty of photos of earth.
LOL... why would we spend $1.5b on Hubble to take pics of the earth?
why cant we spin the motherfucker around and take one snapshot?
the rest of the shit is usually nasa artist renderings because dots that are light years away arent interesting.
Well, for starters, there are already pictures of an earth that is oval.
Digital Man wrote to MRO on 06-05-18 23:14 <=-
Re: Re: The Earth is:
By: MRO to Vk3jed on Tue Jun 05 2018 11:01 pm
Even ham satellites have taken photos of Earth and sent them back.
where are these ham sat pics?
Here's one: reddit.com/r/RTLSDR/comments/8o1bzl/europe_seen_from_noaa19 _hrpt_just_no w/
LOL.... betcha he comes back and says it's fake.... :)
MRO wrote to Vk3jed <=-
no, you just didnt read what i was saying properly.
it's not a private bizarre interpretation.
Well, if you're not prepared to explain clearly (since multiple people came
MRO wrote to Vk3jed <=-
where are these ham sat pics?
Ask and you shall receive. This was taken around 2000, I remember when the photo originally circulated in AMSAT circles. I should mention that I also received telemetry from the same satellite when it was being commissioned.
http://www.spacetoday.org/Satellites/Hamsats/AO40firstpicture.html
they're not THAT dumb. they have a good idea of what happened to it. perhaps a few people were curious.
I would 'think' the Scientist would want to see if the colder atmosphere of the Moon, less Gravity, the Camera always being in Sunlight, or some other thing that is different on the Moon than how it is here on Earth had caused
it's quite easy for anybody to do.
Vk3jed wrote to MRO <=-
MRO wrote to Vk3jed <=-
where are these ham sat pics?
Ask and you shall receive. This was taken around 2000, I remember when the photo originally circulated in AMSAT circles. I should mention
that I also received telemetry from the same satellite when it was
being commissioned.
http://www.spacetoday.org/Satellites/Hamsats/AO40firstpicture.html
https://www.jamsat.or.jp/scope/index_e.html
MRO wrote to Bill McGarrity on 06-06-18 21:49 <=-
Re: The Earth is:
By: Bill McGarrity to MRO on Wed Jun 06 2018 12:37 pm
MRO wrote to Bill McGarrity on 06-05-18 19:45 <=-
Re: The Earth is:
By: Bill McGarrity to Nightfox on Tue Jun 05 2018 12:54 pm
but no photos of earth. strange isnt it.
We have plenty of photos of earth.
LOL... why would we spend $1.5b on Hubble to take pics of the earth?
why cant we spin the motherfucker around and take one snapshot?
the rest of the shit is usually nasa artist renderings because dots that are light years away arent interesting.
Well, for starters, there are already pictures of an earth that is oval.
that's my POINT. people THINK we have an entire photo of the earth.
WE don't or we havent until 2015 and that pic looks fake.
nasa has admitted this.
they showed the guy at nasa working on it and tweaking it. people have pointed out parts of the images where they cut and pasted clouds and
other shit. ---
Some time later I watched the Movie "The Day The Earth Stood Still", and got hooked on watching other Movies about Creatures from Outer Space....
Have you read the book "UFO's What on Earth is happening?".
A friend at work loaned his copy to me and I enjoyed reading it.
That book has a different slant explaining the subject of UFO's.
I'm considering purchasing a Amiga for my little vintage stash. I just bought a Mac G5 on shopgoodwill.com for $10. I'm not sure what I'm
Yeah, it seems like there's fewer choices for computer stuff these days. I Apple/Mac, and Linux. I suppose mobile devices like iOS and Android could be considered major platforms too, since many people use those.
You don't always believe Wikipedia, but do you always believe everything you see on YouTube?
True and even in mobile OSses you see they become so powerful that they think Apple will merge MacOS into a new OS which is like iOS. That means even LESS freedom...
Wikipedia is really bad in some articles... I don't know why people use this website are 'source'...
Re: The Earth is:
By: MRO to Chai on Tue Jun 05 2018 19:53:54
it's quite easy for anybody to do.
Without repeating content? It'd be the longest movie ever made.
As I said, send a $100,000 check to NASA so they'll spin the Hubble for you. You keep stating that the guy was photoshopping yet, as per another member of this sub stated the vidoe you linked us to wasn't really of a NASA employee.
If you want to run around with your tin-hat, that's fine with me but don't get upset when people call you out on your nonsense.
Maybe you should fire up a doobie, grab a bag of potato chips and mellow out. It'll do you good.
there are long videos on youtube of anything that do that.
just bought a Mac G5 on shopgoodwill.com for $10. I'm not sure what I'm
For that money I would also add one to my retro collection :)
think Apple will merge MacOS into a new OS which is like iOS. That means even LESS freedom... see the new MacOS, they put out OpenGL... so those games in steam which are working on OpenGL, gone..... all in favor for their own APIs and in the future custom chips...like the Amiga had but they were much too soon for this. Worked great but people weren't ready for it and choose the more open ibm compatibles, now Apple has a big customer marketshare for them it's more interesting to even tighten them more into lockin OS....
smartphones and tablets. One thing I don't like about both Microsoft and Apple though is that they've made their operating systems more plain-looking, with a flatter appearance and more bland color schemes. I liked the look of Windows 7 and Mac OS X Tiger and Leopard/Snow Leopard.
MRO wrote to Vk3jed <=-
@VIA: VERT/BBSESINF
Re: Re: The Earth is:
By: Vk3jed to MRO on Thu Jun 07 2018 08:17 am
MRO wrote to Vk3jed <=-
no, you just didnt read what i was saying properly.
it's not a private bizarre interpretation.
Well, if you're not prepared to explain clearly (since multiple people came
earth command to space station : delay
space station waits for a second or two to get it and reply.
MRO wrote to Vk3jed <=-
http://www.spacetoday.org/Satellites/Hamsats/AO40firstpicture.html
where's the full pic of the earth. i started out saying there is no
real photo of the earth.
Ed Vance wrote to MRO <=-
I would 'think' the Scientist would want to see if the colder
atmosphere of the Moon, less Gravity, the Camera always being in
Sunlight, or some other thing that is different on the Moon than how it
smartphones and tablets. One thing I don't like about both Microsoft and Apple though is that they've made their operating systems more plain-looking, with a flatter appearance and more bland color schemes. I liked the look of Windows 7 and Mac OS X Tiger and Leopard/Snow Leopard.
Windows 7 was a good OS. Windows 10 just seems sluggish to me, which is odd because I was thinking MS was claiming that Windows 10 was supposed to be lighter. Maybe it's just in my head. Do you think Microsoft will eventuall switch to a subscription model?
Maybe it's just in my head. Do you think Microsoft will
eventually switch to a subscription model?
Windows 7 was a good OS. Windows 10 just seems sluggish to me, which is odd, because I was thinking MS was claiming that Windows 10 was supposed to be lighter. Maybe it's just in my head. Do you think Microsoft will eventually switch to a subscription model?
I've always thought Apple would do better if they opened up their OS to non-Apple machines. I'm certainly not an expert, but apparently Apple does not agree with me anyway, so no matter. I do like the OS. I would prefer to be able to run the OS on a system I custom build for myself.
Now, the rumor of Windows being open source... I can see this being more possible than the subscription model. I believe Microsoft is actually doing better with Azure than Windows and they seemed pretty open about that fact.
Maybe it's just in my head. Do you think Microsoft will
eventually switch to a subscription model?
Yes. They're already *mostly* there with Office in the corporate world. No one buys Office any more, they rent it via Office365.
Re: The Earth is:
By: MRO to Chai on Thu Jun 07 2018 22:34:13
there are long videos on youtube of anything that do that.
Not that long. They've been broadcasting a live feed from the ISS forever, it seems. There are many eyes that watch that feed. It also would be prudent to mention that the ISS can be spotted from the ground. NASA has a site that tells you when the next sighting will occur in your area, as well as the direction in which to look. I would think you could stream the live feed to your phone, verifying that the ISS is recording your area as you watch it fly over.
Re: Amiga's
By: Nightfox to Hawkeye on Thu Jun 07 2018 17:11:46
smartphones and tablets. One thing I don't like about both Microsoft and Apple though is that they've made their operating systems more plain-looking, with a flatter appearance and more bland color schemes. I liked the look of Windows 7 and Mac OS X Tiger and Leopard/Snow Leopard.
Windows 7 was a good OS. Windows 10 just seems sluggish to me, which is odd, because I was thinking MS was claiming that Windows 10 was supposed to be lighter. Maybe it's just in my head. Do you think Microsoft will eventually switch to a subscription model?
space station waits for a second or two to get it and reply.
And why doesn't what I said explain that?
We're hearing both Earth command and Obama in near real time (under a
where's the full pic of the earth. i started out saying there is no real photo of the earth.
Looks like the Earth to me, you're not making sense.
I tend to play games off and on. Paying a regular subscription for something I only use occasionally doesn't make much sense to me, as I would be paying during times I'm not even using it.
I've always thought Apple would do better if they opened up their OS to non-Apple machines. I'm certainly not an expert, but apparently Apple does not agree with me anyway, so no matter. I do like the OS. I would prefer to be able to run the OS on a system I custom build for myself.
MRO wrote to Bill McGarrity on 06-07-18 22:44 <=-
Re: The Earth is:
By: Bill McGarrity to MRO on Thu Jun 07 2018 09:54 am
As I said, send a $100,000 check to NASA so they'll spin the Hubble for you. You keep stating that the guy was photoshopping yet, as per another member of this sub stated the vidoe you linked us to wasn't really of a NASA employee.
whatever video saw wasnt the one i linked. the vid i showed was them actually walking inside of nasa for a documentary.
this was them talking about taping over the moon landing tapes and
losing the telematry data.
regarding the guy that draws and photoshops the earth, all the
information is out there.
it just goes to show how right i am. people widely BELIEVE something, blindly follow the heard without knowing the truth.
there was not a full photograph of the planet earth until 2015. that
is very fucking odd. you can't say it isnt. they had plenty of
chances, but instead had a guy who said he took composites and glued
them together by digital editing on a computer. i dont even think he
did THAT. that shit looks fake and the 2015 pic looks fake.
nasa is great at doing artist renderings. 99% of the shit you see from nasa is fake shit. it's because nobody wants to look at a dot or they dont want to see how dull and boring saturn is from those probe photos. they churn out fake bullshit and cost us billions.
If you want to run around with your tin-hat, that's fine with me but don't get upset when people call you out on your nonsense.
you couldnt pour piss out of a boot if the instructions were written on the bottom, so i'm not worried about your ass.
Maybe you should fire up a doobie, grab a bag of potato chips and mellow out. It'll do you good.
i'm anti drug. maybe you mellowed out TOO much and need to shave off
that neck beard.
I tend to play games off and on. Paying a regular subscription for
something I only use occasionally doesn't make much sense to me, as I
would be paying during times I'm not even using it.
you unsubscribe.
and then pick it up again when you want to play.
with a game model, subscriptions help keep the funding up for development.
Yeah, but the Jobs legacy was all about control. They didn't want people to have a bad experience on hardware that wasn't under their control. Halting the licensing of Mac clones was one of the first things that Jobs did when he came back.
Having a monopoly on the hardware means you get to have
greater control over your product, because you don't have to worry about a clone manufacturer cutting into your market share or bringing prices down.
MRO wrote to Vk3jed <=-
again you miss the point.
it's not what we are hearing. it's what ISS hears.
delays when iss and earth command talk back and forth.
MRO wrote to Vk3jed <=-
missing the point again. why no real picture of the earth
every real full photo of the earth is photoshopped. nasa even says it.
Who cares. The vid you spoke of was discussed by another here and said the guy didn't even work for NASA. No one cares what you think actually.
So, are you going to send NASA $100,000 to prove your point?
You don't have a clue, so kindly leave your insults to yourself. You spout off nonsense when proof has been shown to you. As I said, fire up a doobie and then go fuck off...
and then pick it up again when you want to play.
with a game model, subscriptions help keep the funding up for development.
The thing I'd be concerned with is whether your account/character in the game is deleted when you unsubscribe.
MRO wrote to Vk3jed <=-
missing the point again. why no real picture of the earth
every real full photo of the earth is photoshopped. nasa even says it.
Why would hams bother photoshopping their pics?
As far as the subscription model goes, I'm not sure how that would work out with the OEM line of Windows and computers with Windows pre-installed (again, OEM line). So, the buyer would have to pay the one-time fee for the
As far as the subscription model goes, I'm not sure how that would work out with the OEM line of Windows and computers with Windows pre-installed
Now, the rumor of Windows being open source... I can see this being more possible than the subscription model. I believe Microsoft is actually doing better with Azure than Windows and they seemed pretty open about that fact.
I agree, it would be nice if Apple opened OS X to non-apple machines. But I think the reason they don't want to do that is that Apple wants to sell hardware, and if they opened up OS X to non-Apple machines, fewer people would buy Apple computers. Apple even gives OS X away for free now -
This site has some guides on doing that:
https://www.tonymacx86.com
but still no real photo of the earth
i think a subscription model for the OS would be a pita for them.
windows 10 runs well on my gf's older computer and runs the same as win7 on my newer one.
whats your processor type and how much memory
Re: The Earth is:
By: MRO to Chai on Fri Jun 08 2018 16:07:25
but still no real photo of the earth
If you mean a photo of the entire Earth, that is speculation. If you do not
Re: OS's
By: MRO to Chai on Fri Jun 08 2018 16:09:01
i think a subscription model for the OS would be a pita for them.
windows 10 runs well on my gf's older computer and runs the same as win7 on my newer one.
whats your processor type and how much memory
AMD A6-5200. 4GB of RAM, but video memory is shared. RAM utilization is hovering at about 50%. I have not suspected RAM as being the issue. I suppose it could be something related to pagefile swapping. That's something for me to test.
Yeah, but the Jobs legacy was all about control. They didn't want people to have a bad experience on hardware that wasn't under their control.
Having a monopoly on the hardware means you get to have
greater control over your product, because you don't have to worry about a clone manufacturer cutting into your market share or bringing prices down.
Nightfox wrote to Chai <=-
Re: Mac's
By: Chai to Hawkeye on Fri Jun 08 2018 03:26 am
I've always thought Apple would do better if they opened up their OS to non-Apple machines. I'm certainly not an expert, but apparently Apple does not agree with me anyway, so no matter. I do like the OS. I would prefer to be able to run the OS on a system I custom build for myself.
I agree, it would be nice if Apple opened OS X to non-apple machines.
But I think the reason they don't want to do that is that Apple wants
to sell hardware, and if they opened up OS X to non-Apple machines,
fewer people would buy Apple computers. Apple even gives OS X away for free now - Assuming all of their OS X users own a Mac, their idea is
that you can buy a Mac and upgrade OS X for free.
There are ways of installing OS X on a non-Apple machine though. It's called a 'hackintosh'. There's a community of people figuring out ways
to install the latest OS X on non-Apple machines. If you want to do
that, you have to be careful to buy the right hardware devices that
work with OS X. This site has some guides on doing that: https://www.tonymacx86.com
Nightfox
---
= Synchronet = Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com
Nightfox wrote to Chai <=-
Re: OS's
By: Chai to Nightfox on Fri Jun 08 2018 03:49 am
Windows 7 was a good OS. Windows 10 just seems sluggish to me, which is odd, because I was thinking MS was claiming that Windows 10 was supposed to be lighter. Maybe it's just in my head. Do you think Microsoft will eventually switch to a subscription model?
I don't think Windows 10 is sluggish. It seems fairly fast to me.
It looks like Microsoft may end up going to a subscription model, but I hope they don't. If they do, I might just switch to Linux. I don't
want to suddenly have to start paying a subscription fee to use
something I own which I bought and paid for. The only thing is that sometimes I like to play PC games, and a lot of PC games are made for Windows.
Nightfox
---
= Synchronet = Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com
Yeah, but the Jobs legacy was all about control. They didn't want people to have a bad experience on hardware that wasn't under their control.
He may have had a point. Quality control is much easier on an OS that only has to support a limited number of devices. Apple is a premium computer company. Not much money is made from budget/bargain computers, so I suppose that is the reason they are still alive.
very good at hardware marketing. They can make decent stuff, but it doesn't have the zeal of an Apple product.
I sometimes feel like Microsoft wants to get out of the OS business and just go with Office. If they want to stay in the OS business, they need to figure out a better way of providing updates.
A 4 GB download every 6-8 months and a possible 8-hour install is no way of doing business. (actual experience by me on other people's hardware.)
There are ways of installing OS X on a non-Apple machine though.
Another big reason for locking it in to a limited number of hardware profiles is stability and support. With the limitation, Apple can provide cradle-to-grave support for a limited spectrum of hardware profiles. If you open the OS up to a larger pool of hardware, like Linux and Microsoft products, stability always becomes an issue with drivers and unique configurations.
However, I feel this is the biggest reason not to use Apple products and use others. With Microsoft and Linux, you have choices. With Apple, the choices are made for you.
I sometimes feel like Microsoft wants to get out of the OS business and just go with Office. If they want to stay in the OS business, they need to figure out a better way of providing updates.
A 4 GB download every 6-8 months and a possible 8-hour install is no way of doing business. (actual experience by me on other people's hardware.)
If I were Microsoft, and I wanted a subscription to work, I think I'd do both. I would bilaterally sell a full license and a subscription model. In this way, people would have their choice. To get people to buy into the
you need to update your hardware. that's not enough memory.
He may have had a point. Quality control is much easier on an OS that only has to support a limited number of devices. Apple is a premium computer company. Not much money is made from budget/bargain computers, so I suppose that is the reason they are still alive.
Re: OS's
By: MRO to Chai on Fri Jun 08 2018 10:19 pm
you need to update your hardware. that's not enough memory.
I used to see a lot of people with not enough RAM in their computers. Sometimes people would tell me that their computer is really slow, and the first thing I'd do is check how much RAM they have, and there was a good chance they didn't have enough RAM and their computer was slow because it was constantly swapping to the hard drive. My uncle's PC was like that years ago, so we went to Best Buy and I had him upgrade his RAM, and it fixed the slowness problem.
OH.. they ran out of money and he only put 4gigs of ram in there.
she never put more memory in there because she had no idea of what kind to get or how to do it.
and 5 years ago, my budget computer was a lot faster than hers, just because that guy made that mistake. also he put in a huge heatsink that blocked some memory bays. horrible judgement!
steve jobs was a control freak, but there was a method to his madness.
he was especially correct about flash being a piece of junk. not only
did it drain devices, but adobe couldnt stay on top of all the security flaws.
apple products appeal to a certain person. some of these guys would
buy a chunk of cow shit for 1,000 if it had an apple limited edition sticker on it.
i have never owned an apple product and i wouldnt let my son own any.
my step daughter has had 7 iphones. they all broke. she has broke
ZERO android phones. these are cheapo phones, too.
Nightfox wrote to Chai <=-
I'm not sure that just supporting a limited number of devices is always the solution. OSes these days have the ability to support any number
of devices via drivers, and if a driver causes the system to become
I sometimes feel like Microsoft wants to get out of the OS business and just go with Office. If they want to stay in the OS business, they need
to figure out a better way of providing updates.
apple products appeal to a certain person. some of these guys would buy a chunk of cow shit for 1,000 if it had an apple limited edition sticker on itYup, I've been drinking the Apple kool-aid for way too long. I'm not into apple computers as I don't do much video editing and such. I've been a pc gamer for a long time and MACS just don't get it done in that area. But this is my last Iphone. I'm still using the Iphone 6 (should I say trying to use because whatever they did with the last upgrade really junked this thing up) but when it's done I'm going with a Samsung.
i have never owned an apple product and i wouldnt let my son own any.
my step daughter has had 7 iphones. they all broke. she has broke ZERO android phones. these are cheapo phones, too.
Re: Re: OS's
By: Jazzy_J to Nightfox on Sat Jun 09 2018 07:16 am
I sometimes feel like Microsoft wants to get out of the OS business and j go with Office. If they want to stay in the OS business, they need to fig out a better way of providing updates.
A 4 GB download every 6-8 months and a possible 8-hour install is no way doing business. (actual experience by me on other people's hardware.)
i'm not a big office user, but we have it at work. are you sure you dont hav some hardware issue causing this problem? 8 hrs to install is a lotYeah, the last two big upgrades were only about an hour on all of my computers, laptops and home units.
MRO wrote to Vk3jed <=-
Why would hams bother photoshopping their pics?
they dont have a full photo of the earth
Jazzy_J wrote to Nightfox <=-
A 4 GB download every 6-8 months and a possible 8-hour install is no
way of doing business. (actual experience by me on other people's hardware.)
Nightfox wrote to Jazzy_J <=-
I doubt Microsoft wants to get out of the OS business. Operating
systems have been one of Microsoft's main businesses for a long time,
and a lot of people now rely on Windows. I'd think there's still
plenty of demand for Windows, so I doubt they would want to abandon
that market.
I sometimes feel like Microsoft wants to get out of the OS business and just go with Office. If they want to stay in the OS business, they need to figure out a better way of providing updates.
I would agree that they would like to get out of the OS business, but don't you think control over their OS is somewhat essential for maintaining market share in Enterprise and Office products?
I agree with you on the updates. I enjoy the free features, but a more thought out delivery system would be nice.
... Computer Hacker wanted. Must have own axe.
I doubt Microsoft wants to get out of the OS business. Operating
systems have been one of Microsoft's main businesses for a long
time, and a lot of people now rely on Windows. I'd think there's
still plenty of demand for Windows, so I doubt they would want to
abandon that market.
Especially since OSes are a captive market. Try buying a computer that doesn't have an OEM Windows license that you paid for indirectly.
MRO wrote to Vk3jed <=-
Why would hams bother photoshopping their pics?
they dont have a full photo of the earth
And you know this because..? You've plundered the archives of JAMSAT?
best case that everyone wanted, huge fans.
good amd processor [ew]
steve jobs was a control freak, but there was a method to his
madness. he was especially correct about flash being a piece of
junk. not only did it drain devices, but adobe couldnt stay on top
of all the security flaws.
I certainly do not miss flash. I don't know many people that do.
Not all Apple products appeal to me, but I would like to use MacOS. I think it's still a lesser target to hackers than Windows.
It also has a pretty decent selection of software.
I use Android for
mobile, mainly
because of its flexibility. Apple has some oddities like no apps for blocking known
spam numbers. That may have changed, but it seems like that was a thing the last time
I touched an iPhone.
People say they are easier to use, but I find Android to be just as easy.
I've put my Ipad down for a Surface Pro (which I'm really loving still after 2 years).
Re: Mac's
By: Chai to poindexter FORTRAN on Sat Jun 09 2018 02:30 am
He may have had a point. Quality control is much easier on an OS that only has to support a limited number of devices. Apple is a premium computer company. Not much money is made from budget/bargain computers, so I suppose that is the reason they are still alive.
I'm not sure that just supporting a limited number of devices is always the solution. OSes these days have the ability to support any number of devices via drivers, and if a driver causes the system to become unstable, I think it's more of an issue with the driver rather than the OS. I suppose an OS could still do whatever it could to keep a driver from making the OS unstable, but there's probably only so much the OS could do.
Apple sells hardware (mostly), not OSes. And if their hardware (e.g. computers) crash because of buggy drivers, they suffer the support cost and reputation hit as a result. They (like Microsoft) have strict driver certification processes so that only solid/tested/approved drivers may be installed (without a hassle, at least). I imagine since Apple makes/controls their hardware (most of it anyway), they can have even more strict control over what devices and drivers may be supported than Microsoft.
Microsoft (Windows) has much longer and uncontrolled legacy when it comes to supported hardware and thus has a bigger burden when it cames to creating a stable system. I'd imagine their Surface systems are probably more stable than your average PC because they (like Apple's notebooks, tablets, phones) completely control the hardware and all critical software (device drivers) on those platforms.
Geo wrote to Chai <=-
Given recent events it seems like Microsoft has its eyes firmly set on Buying control of Linux and as much high profile open source as it can
get its hands on.
For what real reason is anyones guess!
Operations wrote to MRO <=-
upgrade really junked this thing up) but when it's done I'm going with
a Samsung. I've put my Ipad down for a Surface Pro (which I'm really loving still after 2 years).
MRO wrote to Vk3jed <=-
there wasnt an entire photo of the earth for over 40 years. then in
2015 they say they have one but looks fake to me.
Nightfox wrote to Chai <=-
I certainly do not miss flash. I don't know many people that do.
I know of people who still block JavaScript, and occasionally I'll send them a link and they'll say they can't view it because they have JavaScript disabled.
Not all Apple products appeal to me, but I would like to use MacOS. I think it's still a lesser target to hackers than Windows
If more people used MacOS, I imagine more hackers would start targeting it.
It also has a pretty decent selection of software.
It does, although if you like playing PC games, it seems Windows is the most supported OS for games.
I use Android for
mobile, mainly
because of its flexibility. Apple has some oddities like no apps for blocking known
spam numbers. That may have changed, but it seems like that was a thing the last time
I touched an iPhone.
People say they are easier to use, but I find Android to be just as easy.
Nightfox wrote to Digital Man <=-
One thing I've wondered is whether 3rd-party hardware manufacturers
have to go through Microsoft's driver certification program if their drivers won't be shipped with Windows. For instance, if a video card manufacturer makes a new graphics card, Windows could use Microsoft's default video driver and the PC builder could install the specific
driver for the card.
Chai wrote to Operations <=-
My brother is an avid Apple user, but he uses a Surface Pro for work.
Even he admits, it's a pretty decent tech.
Nightfox wrote to Chai <=-
I was surprised when Apple blocked Flash. At the time, Flash still
seemed fairly widely used, so having a system that didn't support Flash meant that many web sites would be unusable. But these days, I don't think that's an issue anymore.
I know of people who still block JavaScript, and occasionally I'll send them a link and they'll say they can't view it because they have JavaScript disabled.
If more people used MacOS, I imagine more hackers would start targeting it.
It also has a pretty decent selection of software.
It does, although if you like playing PC games, it seems Windows is the most supported OS for games.
I tend to prefer Android too. It seems iOS can recognize spam numbers these days though. My wife has an iPhone, and I seem to remember
seeing it reporting some phone numbers as spam when a call comes in.
Re: OS's
By: MRO to Nightfox on Sat Jun 09 2018 05:43 pm
best case that everyone wanted, huge fans.
good amd processor [ew]
I don't think there's anything wrong with AMD. I used AMD processors for years, but recently I have been using Intel processors. AMD was ahead of
AMD bought ATI years ago, and I've heard the onboard graphics on AMD's processors has gotten really good.
I certainly do not miss flash. I don't know many people that do.
I was surprised when Apple blocked Flash. At the time, Flash still seemed fairly widely used, so having a system that didn't support Flash meant that many web sites would be unusable. But these days, I don't think that's an
MacOS is (or was when I used it) pretty nice..
At least on 64 bit, drivers need to be digitally signed, which would require certification by Microsoft on some level, unless you use a registry hack to put Windows into test mode.
I tend to prefer Android too. It seems iOS can recognize spam
numbers these days though. My wife has an iPhone, and I seem to
remember seeing it reporting some phone numbers as spam when a call
comes in.
If that's the case, I need to configure my mom's iPhone to block spam calls. She gets a ridiculous amount. There is talk going around that
the FCC may decide to cap the number of daily calls people can make to thwart robo-dialing. If it works, I'm for it.
i think there's a lot wrong with amd. if you put an amd processor against an intel processor. the difference in performance is very noticable.
I don't think there's anything wrong with AMD. I used AMD processors for years, but recently I have been using Intel processors. AMD was ahead of
i think there's a lot wrong with amd. if you put an amd processor against an intel processor. the difference in performance is very noticable.
AMD bought ATI years ago, and I've heard the onboard graphics on AMD's processors has gotten really good.
i'm through with ATI too.I remember in the years when I couldn't afford an Intel processor, the AMD's were much cheaper. I'd build an decent gaming machine, but there were always problems with some (not a lot) games and how an AMD chip could, or just wouldn't, run them. Sometimes the company would put out a patch and other times you were out of luck. I think they've come a long way, but if I can afford Intel, I'm going that way.
I've been using only Intel now for the last 7 years or so though, as I think Intel has the better processors these days.
I tend to prefer Android too. It seems iOS can recognize spam
numbers these days though. My wife has an iPhone, and I seem to
remember seeing it reporting some phone numbers as spam when a call
comes in.
If that's the case, I need to configure my mom's iPhone to block spam calls. She gets a ridiculous amount. There is talk going around that the FCC may decide to cap the number of daily calls people can make to thwart robo-dialing. If it works, I'm for it.
I'm not sure if it can block spam numbers, but it should at least report the number as possible spam when you're receiving a call.
Nightfox wrote to Chai <=-
I'm not sure if it can block spam numbers, but it should at least
report the number as possible spam when you're receiving a call.
I've been using only Intel now for the last 7 years or so though, as I
think Intel has the better processors these days.
not only THAT, but programs are often optimized for intel processors
I have Google Voive with call screening on; if your number isn't on my contact list and in certain groups, you'll be required to annouce who you
I remember in the years when I couldn't afford an Intel processor, the AMD's were much cheaper. I'd build an decent gaming machine, but there were always problems with some (not a lot) games and how an AMD chip could, or just wouldn't, run them. Sometimes the company would put out a patch and other times you were out of luck. I think they've come a long way, but if I can afford Intel, I'm going that way.
Jagossel wrote to Nightfox <=-
I'm not sure if it can block spam numbers, but it should at least report the number as possible spam when you're receiving a call.
I have Google Voive with call screening on; if your number isn't on my contact list and in certain groups, you'll be required to annouce who
you atre and from there, I can decide on either: let the call through,
let the call through but record the call, or block the call. I can mark certain numbers as spam and Google Voice won't let the call through. I looked through my spam calls one time and I had no idea that there were
so many scam calls come in.
On 06-12-18 09:14, Nightfox wrote to Vk3jed <=-
I agree it's a nice OS. But I find it disappointing that apple has
made it more bland and flat-looking over the years. I liked the look
of OS X Tiger and Leopard. It seems ironic that for a company that
prides itself on making aesthetically-pleasing products, OS X looks
more bland these days. They're not alone though - Microsoft has done
the same thing to Windows, and Google has done the same with Android.
On 06-12-18 09:15, Nightfox wrote to Vk3jed <=-
There's a command you can do at the command line to put Windows into
test mode, though I believe that is mainly intended for developers who haven't signed their driver yet.
On 06-12-18 09:20, Nightfox wrote to MRO <=-
Intel and AMD have leapfrogged each other sometimes. I've looked at benchmarks and reviews over the years, and I distinctly remember
reading something around 2000 or 2001 saying AMD's Athlon was matching
or exceeding what Intel had at the time. Also, it seemed that AMD was always more about bang for the buck - They might not always perform
like Intel CPUs, but supposedly there was more value for your money
with AMD.
I've been using only Intel now for the last 7 years or so though, as I think Intel has the better processors these days.
Microsoft was going that direction with Windows 8, where even on a desktop, it looked like a mobile OS. Many people complained about that, so Microsoft improved it a bit in 8.1, and with Windows 10 they made it more like like a desktop OS again (with a revamped Start menu). Apple tends not to make such
I'm not sure Apple will merge Mac OS and iOS to the point of them being basically the same. Desktops and laptops are still used differently than Apple though is that they've made their operating systems more plain-looking, with a flatter appearance and more bland color schemes. I
Windows 7 was a good OS. Windows 10 just seems sluggish to me, which is odd, because I was thinking MS was claiming that Windows 10 was supposed to
I've used Google Voice since the first year or two it was offered. It has been a godsend for all the junk calls I used to get. I also love that I can text or call from my computer. Plus, I don't have to worry about number portability when I decide to change phones.
I actually went a year or two WITHOUT a cellphone, back when the kids were younger and I stayed at home with them.
I had Snow Leopard, which I didn't mind the look of. As for Android, I'm running Android 6, which still looks visually appealing.
I did buy AMD back in those days, when the Athlon was considered the better CPU, but I was unimpressed. And I actually had to underclock my Athlon for stability. Even the dodgy early P4 outperformed it in the real world.
The more basic look amazed me too, to be honest I like it more, more colors more distraction, etc... but it is weird as we have more GPU power and RAM.
Hawkeye wrote to Chai <=-
I ran Windows 7 and Windows 10 on old machines (2 GB RAM) and they seem
to perform better with surfing and office taks on Windows 10. That is a nice job of Microsoft if you ask me.
Interesting, I ran AMD processors for years and don't remember ever having a problem running a game. And I was often a fairly heavy PC gamer.I wish I could tell you the games, but I cannot remember. I might have been using a cheaper version of an AMD chip. They had different levels of processors back then, didn't they? But I remember it happening.
Nightfox
I wish I could tell you the games, but I cannot remember. I might have been using a cheaper version of an AMD chip. They had different levels of processors back then, didn't they? But I remember it happening.
On 06-13-18 09:20, Nightfox wrote to Vk3jed <=-
Android 5 was when Google introduced the new "Material Design" look &
feel of Android, which made it look more flat and bland looking (IMO).
On 06-13-18 09:24, Nightfox wrote to Vk3jed <=-
Interseting.. I had never had stability issues with AMD. And in fact, there have been one or two AMD CPUs that I overclocked. One was an AMD 486DX4-133 that I overclocked to 160mhz by increasing the bus speed
from 33mhz to 40mhz. Around the times when AMD was making their Athlon
CPUs, I thought AMDs were typically easier to overclock because Intel
CPUs typically had a locked multiplier. Intel CPUs have become easier
to overclock these days, if you buy a "K" version with the unlocked multiplier.
I did have better luck with AMD in the 406 days myself, but I remember the Athlon being hailed as the best yet from AMD and was disappointed.
AMD A6-5200. 4GB of RAM, but video memory is shared. RAM utilization is hovering at about 50%. I have not suspected RAM as being the issue. I
Interesting, I ran AMD processors for years and don't remember ever having a problem running a game. And I was often a fairly heavy PC gamer.
On 06-14-18 09:44, Nightfox wrote to Vk3jed <=-
I ran AMD CPUs for so long that I guess I didn't have much to compare
them with. I was never really disappointed with AMD when I used their processors.
Especially in VR and Games this is noticable. Even the modern AMDs multicore can handle well video editing and workstation tasks but not gaming and I want all. Virtual Machines, gaming, etc...
On 06-14-18 19:45, Hawkeye wrote to MRO <=-
Install a SSD for booting and most important applications will speed things a lot up.
I believe one of the Apollo missions to the Moon was to find the spot where one of the Surveyor's had crashed and to cut the Television Camera off of the wreckage and bring it back to Earth to be studied.
True.. But I remember when Apple Macs used to be expandable - at least, the Mac Pro (silver metal tower) and many of the earlier Macs from the 90s, used to have expansion ports, much like Windows desktop PCs. I seem to remember Nvidia having a Mac OS driver for some of their video cards. I'm not sure if Apple still offers an expandable Mac like that anymore, but even so, 3rd-party hardware developers could develop their own devices that plug in via USB, and they would need to develop their own driver.
Also, I remember when Apple used to sell their OS X (I think the new versions of OS X used to cost around $120, about the same as an OEM copy of Windows). These days, I don't think Apple charges money for OS X anymore.
These days, Apple is pushing the "expansion through Thunderbolt" mythos. Theoretically, since Thunderbolt offers a direct bus directly to the system bus, you could take an underpower Mac laptop, plug into into an external expansion chassis, and have video cards, etc., in that chassis that'd make it a much beefier system. A few of these chassis exist, but they all cost upwards of $800 just for the empty box.
I am bitter about their war on upgradeability. One of the reasons I'm still using a 2011-era MacBook Pro is because it's one of the last that you can actually add RAM or upgrade the HDD. Everything after that was soldered on.
These days, Apple is pushing the "expansion through Thunderbolt" mythos.
Re: Mac's
By: Derision to Nightfox on Mon Jun 18 2018 03:48 am
These days, Apple is pushing the "expansion through Thunderbolt" mythos.
Before, they went with "expansion through SCSI".
It's funny for mainly Apple to be pushing Thunderbolt, since Thunderbolt is an Intel technology. I thought Thunderbolt was supposed to start appearing in non-Apple PCs by now.
Yeah, I'm not really excited by Apple's latest hardware either for the same reason. I've had some Macs in the recent past, including a 2011-era Macbook Pro, which I liked because it was a 17 inch and they still had the DVD drive. I had also upgraded the RAM in it. Now Apple has dropped the 17-inch MacBook Pro and have removed the optical drives from all their Macs (though they never even had blu-ray anyway). I remember hearing that their Mac Mini started having soldered-on RAM, but I thought I read recently that they're going back to having upgradeable RAM.
Before, they went with "expansion through SCSI". I had a IIci with 12 mb of RAM and a cache card (my favorite Mac of all time). 500 MB drive inside, a 1GB external HP drive, external DDS-2 drive, then an Apple CD-ROM, and finally a ZIP drive. Getting them all terminated and talking to each other and in the right order was a Black Art.
Before, they went with "expansion through SCSI".
Don't forget "expansion through FireWire"!
digital man
On 06-20-18 01:17, Derision wrote to Nightfox <=-
hoped it would. Kind of like Firewire, though I've actually had some
use for Firewire.
It's funny for mainly Apple to be pushing Thunderbolt, since
Thunderbolt is an Intel technology. I thought Thunderbolt was
supposed to start appearing in non-Apple PCs by now.
I think that it's in a very few non-Apple machines. Even Apple has sort of downplayed the importance of Thunderbolt by rolling it into the USB-C standard, probably because it never really took off like they'd hoped it would. Kind of like Firewire, though I've actually had some use for Firewire.
The new iMac Pro has upgradeable RAM, but it's really only in theory. The RAM is not soldered on, but you need to be seriously comfortable disassembling Apple equipment, much of which is held together with glue and epoxy, to do it. It's like, regular RAM DIMMs but in a sealed chassis, so access them at your own risk. There's no door to them.
They are talking about going back to a modular, upgradeable Mac Pro. The current garbage can version is awful, and I don't think it did very well versus the old, entirely functional, tower systems they had. Lord knows what that'll look like, though, and it isn't supposed to be released 'til 2019.
finally a ZIP drive. Getting them all terminated and talking to each other and in the right order was a Black Art.
Currently busy with this kind of Voodoo... remember it was hard back in the days but now I'm being older it seems its even more harder. Trying to get a SCSI CD-ROM working in my Amiga 2000... fucking (pardon me) switches on the mainboard for terminating and on the scsi controller and on the device... people who complain about Windows 10 should be jailed ;)
Recently I've been looking at retro computer stuff on Pinterest, and I've thought it would be cool to try to buy some older computers (maybe some older Macs and Amigas), but financially I don't think it really makes much sense.. Plus I'd have to find room for them..
I want to run a DOS or OS/2 box for a month exclusively and see how it goes.
poindexter FORTRAN wrote to Jazzy_J <=-
Jazzy_J wrote to Nightfox <=-
A 4 GB download every 6-8 months and a possible 8-hour install is no
way of doing business. (actual experience by me on other people's hardware.)
That's just for you home users. They have a program similar to Ubuntu's LTS releases for commercial users that limits the cool features, but extends support much longer.
Imagine patching and upgrading 5000 PCs...
... What if I told you you can't hurt the newcomers?
--- MultiMail/XT v0.49
= Synchronet = realitycheckBBS -- http://realitycheckBBS.org
MRO wrote to Jazzy_J <=-
Re: Re: OS's
By: Jazzy_J to Nightfox on Sat Jun 09 2018 07:16 am
I sometimes feel like Microsoft wants to get out of the OS business and just go with Office. If they want to stay in the OS business, they need to figure out a better way of providing updates.
A 4 GB download every 6-8 months and a possible 8-hour install is no way of doing business. (actual experience by me on other people's hardware.)
i'm not a big office user, but we have it at work. are you sure you
dont have some hardware issue causing this problem? 8 hrs to install is
a lot ---
= Synchronet = ::: BBSES.info - free BBS services :::
Nightfox wrote to Jazzy_J <=-This was a running i3 laptop, low memory. Horrible cheap device from Office Depot. Not mine. My systems pretty much all run *nix except a single i5 laptop with SSDs that I use mostly to let it update.
Re: Re: OS's
By: Jazzy_J to Nightfox on Sat Jun 09 2018 07:16 am
I sometimes feel like Microsoft wants to get out of the OS business and just go with Office. If they want to stay in the OS business, they need to figure out a better way of providing updates.
I doubt Microsoft wants to get out of the OS business. Operating
systems have been one of Microsoft's main businesses for a long time,
and a lot of people now rely on Windows. I'd think there's still
plenty of demand for Windows, so I doubt they would want to abandon
that market.
A 4 GB download every 6-8 months and a possible 8-hour install is no way of doing business. (actual experience by me on other people's hardware.)
Are you referring to new Windows installs, or Windows updates? I personally don't mind installing an OS on my own machine, since I like
to build my own desktop PC. And pre-built PCs come with a
pre-installed version of Windows anyway (which is installed by the manufacturer).
Nightfox
---
= Synchronet = Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com
On 06-20-18 09:46, Nightfox wrote to Derision <=-
I've heard that in Apple's beginnings, when they made their first PC
and their Apple II, it sounded like they were fairly open designs, and
They are talking about going back to a modular, upgradeable Mac Pro. The current garbage can version is awful, and I don't think it did very well versus the old, entirely functional, tower systems they had. Lord knows what that'll look like, though, and it isn't supposed to be released 'til 2019.
On 06-20-18 18:45, Hawkeye wrote to poindexter FORTRAN <=-
Currently busy with this kind of Voodoo... remember it was hard back in the days but now I'm being older it seems its even more harder. Trying
to get a SCSI CD-ROM working in my Amiga 2000... fucking (pardon me) switches on the mainboard for terminating and on the scsi controller
and on the device... people who complain about Windows 10 should be
jailed ;)
On 06-20-18 14:37, poindexter FORTRAN wrote to Nightfox <=-
I want to run a DOS or OS/2 box for a month exclusively and see how it goes.
The Apple II was fairly open, and a number of third parties made carde for it. One of the more interesting was the Microsoft Softcard, which allows the Apple to run CP/M using the card's on board Z80 processor. The way the card worked was quite interesting. Can't recall the specifics, but it was explained in detail in the owner's manual (which I have somewhere).
From memory, there were a number of Apple clones, and that was one of the reasons the Mac was a closed design.
The LTS version only last for a year, then you have to upgrade.
On 06-21-18 08:40, Nightfox wrote to Vk3jed <=-
That's interesting.. I've seen ads for an 80s Mac (or some Apple computer) that they advertised as being IBM-compatible, which sould run
both Mac and IBM (DOS?) software. I also remember hearing that one (or
some?) of the PowerPC Macs in the mid-90s had an IBM PC compatibility
card which would also let them run PC DOS/Windows software. I think it was the Performa line.. I'm not sure if that was true though - My high
I remember there being Mac clones for a short time when Steve Jobs was
not at Apple. I remember there being a 'Power Computing' that had some Mac clones on the market.
some?) of the PowerPC Macs in the mid-90s had an IBM PC
compatibility card which would also let them run PC DOS/Windows
software. I think it was the Performa line.. I'm not sure if that
was true though - My high
I don't remember that, but doesn't mean it didn't happen. :)
Pre-Mac, there were things like Apricots and other fruity clones. I actually own an interesting one called a Royal II, which is a Japanese clone (complete with Japanese keyboard!), but it runs Apple II software perfectly well (I have fired it up - had to hack in an old IBM-PC power supply to make it work). It also seems fully hardware compatible. I was able to run my Microsoft Softcard in it.
I was thinking of the very early experiences of trying to get a Rocket
up in to the Upper Atmosphere, the 1950's, before NASA was established.
I can't recall the name of the earlier Space Agency.
I agree it's a nice OS. But I find it disappointing that apple has made it more bland and flat-looking over the years. I liked the look of OS X Tiger Leopard. It seems ironic that for a company that prides itself on making aesthetically-pleasing products, OS X looks more bland these days. They're alone though - Microsoft has done the same thing to Windows, and Google has done the same with Android.
I believe that Air Force was trying to put a satalite into space and were working on their own space program, even after NASA was formed, although theirs was for military purposes of course. NACA was doing some spece research as well, but they were absorbed into NASA when it was created.
I agree it's a nice OS. But I find it disappointing that apple has
made it more bland and flat-looking over the years. I liked the look
of OS X Tiger Leopard. It seems ironic that for a company that prides
It must be the style for the decade or something, although who decided this I don't know. I find it interesting that it has gone full circle though. They started out flat, then we started seeing 3D in Windows 3.x and even newer DOS applications, and now we are back to the flat look.
On 06-21-18 16:42, Nightfox wrote to Vk3jed <=-
I don't remember that, but doesn't mean it didn't happen. :)
Some information on DOS compatibility cards for Apple Macs: https://engt.co/2yGEV8D
That's cool. I think it's interesting to learn about the hybrid
computer environments they came up with. I think OS/2 is an
interesting story too - I've heard its Windows compatibility was
probably bad for OS/2, because developers ended up just developing
their apps for Windows, knowing they would work in both Windows and
OS/2, and that helped Windows continue to take off.
I remember dealing with jumpers back in the day. I also had a SCSI controller with a couple of SCSI drives for a short time and dealing with terminating them. But SCSI drives always were more expensive, so I eventually went back to IDE (perhaps SATA was around by then).
Recently I've been looking at retro computer stuff on Pinterest, and I've thought it would be cool to try to buy some older computers (maybe some older Macs and Amigas), but financially I don't think it really makes much sense.. Plus I'd have to find room for them..
SCSI was always compared to IDE/RLL/MFM in that time very fast especially with multiple IO tasks... now SATA is superior and with NVME... SCSI is succeeded with SAS.
@VIA: VERT/DIGDIST
@MSGID: <5B2C49E9.36046.dove_dove-gen@digitaldistortionbbs.com>
@REPLY: <5B183991.29475.dove-gen@capitolcityonline.net>
Re: Re: The Earth is:
By: Ed Vance to Nightfox on Wed Jun 06 2018 01:40 pm
I was thinking of the very early experiences of trying to get a Rocket
up in to the Upper Atmosphere, the 1950's, before NASA was established.
I can't recall the name of the earlier Space Agency.
I believe that Air Force was trying to put a satalite into space and
were working on their own space program, even after NASA was formed, although theirs was for military purposes of course. NACA was doing
some spece research as well, but they were absorbed into NASA when it
was created.
I've had use for Firewire too, was good for some video applications - from working with mini-DV camcorders to astrophotography. Sadly, the Macbook that I used to use for astrophotography is now long dead. :(
I imagne Thunderbolt could have had a better chance of taking off if it had been standard in more than just Apple computers. I think that's why USB took off and Firewire didn't make it very far - USB is a standard in basically every PC, whereas Firewire was mainly used in Apple Macs.
That seems silly.. I like having a PC that's easy to upgrade. Sometimes it seems Apple has OCD with making their PCs foolproof.
I've heard that in Apple's beginnings, when they made their first PC and their Apple II, it sounded like they were fairly open designs, and I seem to remember hearing they also included the specs with their computers. And with their earlire Mac Pro computers, I remember seeing ads saying they were easy to upgrade. That seemed to be one of their selling points.
I think Apple's more interested in making their machines... appliances. They're less a computer company now in that they're not really interested in selling to professionals or to enthusiasts and are focusing more on basic consumers. People that want to use a computer or tablet but don't
I'd love to see that Apple specialness come back, but again, every Mac is essentially just a regular old x86 clone that runs macOS and there isn't anything exciting about the hardware. So I don't see it happening unless they go ARM or something.
poindexter FORTRAN wrote to Jazzy_J <=-
Re: Re: OS's
By: Jazzy_J to poindexter FORTRAN on Thu Jun 21 2018 01:20 am
The LTS version only last for a year, then you have to upgrade.
I thought they were three years, hence the name Long Term Support?
---
= Synchronet = realitycheckBBS -- http://realitycheckBBS.org
On 06-23-18 01:18, Derision wrote to Vk3jed <=-
Oooh, what'd you use for astrophotography? I used to love modifying Firewire webcams... the Orange Micro iBot things (big eyeballs on a
weird foot) were awesome for that. One I removed the infrared filter so it'd do night vision... another, I modified to mount to a telescope or microscope lens. My telescope was garbage, so my pictures were never fantastic, but I've seen some online that aren't half bad.
On 06-23-18 01:25, Derision wrote to Nightfox <=-
I knew a few people that used Firewire outside of Macs. It was big in audio circles in the late '90s, early '00s, because you could assemble
a fairly respectable Pro Tools rack with Firewire.
I was surprised that something that was serial (like SATA) was actually faster than what came before, which I think was parallel.. Same with USB, it's a serial bus but is faster than the older COM port technology.
I actually used Firewire on a Windows laptop (with a PCMCIA card) before I got the Mac for astrophotography and DV editing, but the Mac came with Firewire and better software was available for both at the time
On 06-23-18 10:28, poindexter FORTRAN wrote to Vk3jed <=-
That reminds me - I have a firewire card somewhere, got it when I
bought my first DSLR, which had it.
I'm finally upgrading my pokey yet capable core2duo system, finally
bought a USB3 card, a USB3 card reader, and an Esata port for the back.
My backup drive has eSATA, and my phone has USB3. USB2 is finally out
of my system.
On 06-23-18 10:21, poindexter FORTRAN wrote to Nightfox <=-
Yeah, old hard drive technology was pretty slow, I assume it matched
the drives of the day. Why spend money on faster interfaces when the drives and the OS can only spin/transfer data so quickly?
On 06-23-18 10:21, poindexter FORTRAN wrote to Nightfox <=-
Yeah, old hard drive technology was pretty slow, I assume it matched the drives of the day. Why spend money on faster interfaces when the drives and the OS can only spin/transfer data so quickly?
It was still faster than the main CPU could handle. Remember when sectors h to be interleaved to allow time for the rest of the system to catch up to th HDD? That was one of those things you setup when you low level formatted th drive. :)
... To an alligator, do we taste like chicken?
And, more recently, the shuttle program was co-opted. They were expecting to launch a ton of shuttles on military missions from Vandenberg AFB in California - apparently it was better for polar orbits, which they wanted fo their satellites.
It was probably the NACA in charge of the U.S. Rocket tests in the 1950's. Thanks!
On 06-24-18 23:18, Boraxman wrote to Vk3jed <=-
... To an alligator, do we taste like chicken?
I had connected some old hard drives (about 250MB - 500MB) to a modern
PC via a USB/IDA adapater and got some good speeds out of them. A
175MB hard drive that I connected this way could be backed up
completely quite quickly.
I was surprised that something that was serial (like SATA) was
actually faster than what came before, which I think was parallel..
Same with USB, it's a serial bus but is faster than the older COM
port technology.
Serial ports and USB are both serial - USB stands for Universal Serial Bus.
Yeah, old hard drive technology was pretty slow, I assume it matched the drives of the day. Why spend money on faster interfaces when the drives and the OS can only spin/transfer data so quickly?
I guess that's true.. I forgot COM ports were serial ports. But there wa also the parallel port, which printers often used.
The problem with parallel is that as the clock rate on the port goes up it rapidly becomes impossible to keep the signals in sync over connectors and cables of unknown length or condition. Sure an 8-bit parallel interface is eight times faster than serial, up until you reach a couple MHz, at which point everything kind of falls apart.
On 06-25-18 05:39, Static wrote to Nightfox <=-
The problem with parallel is that as the clock rate on the port goes up
it rapidly becomes impossible to keep the signals in sync over
connectors and cables of unknown length or condition. Sure an 8-bit parallel interface is eight times faster than serial, up until you
reach a couple MHz, at which point everything kind of falls apart.
Nightfox wrote to Mr. Cool <=-
I agree. There was a graphic someone made comparing Windows 2.0 to Windows 8's Metro apps, and they looked really similar.
I was surprised that something that was serial (like SATA) was actually faster than what came before, which I think was parallel.. Same with USB, it's a serial bus but is faster than the older COM port technology.
It was still faster than the main CPU could handle. Remember when sectors h to be interleaved to allow time for the rest of the system to catch up to th HDD? That was one of those things you setup when you low level formatted th drive. :)
I had always heard that SCSI drives were faster though..compared to ide/pata and some early sata yes, the cpu load was very low, all controller load. multiple tasks scsi was superior, thats why used in servers a lot.
I used a CCD astro camera, basically a high sensitivity industrial webcam without a lens. It was fitted to the eyepiece tube, so that the CCD was placed at the focal point of the telescope.
I got good planetary pics, which is what the webcam style devices are best at - small, bright objects. Unfortunately, the telescope, while a reasonably good 6" reflector has a short focal length, which makes it better suited to wide field viewing of fainter objects, where light gathering power is more important than magnification. But the best camera for deep space objects is a DSLR (without a lens), and I've never owned a DSLR. :(
Re: Mac'sI remember doing that on my IBM-PC clone with SCSI termination... and I found it to be more reliable than the IDE form.
By: Derision to Nightfox on Mon Jun 18 2018 03:48 am
These days, Apple is pushing the "expansion through Thunderbolt" mythos.
Before, they went with "expansion through SCSI". I had a IIci with 12
mb of RAM and a cache card (my favorite Mac of all time). 500 MB drive inside, a 1GB external HP drive, external DDS-2 drive, then an Apple CD-ROM, and finally a ZIP drive. Getting them all terminated and
talking to each other and in the right order was a Black Art.
On 06-27-18 00:38, Derision wrote to Vk3jed <=-
The best I got was some pictures of the moon... once, I got a slightly streaky Jupiter, but again, I had an awful telescope which would wobble
if you looked at it wrong, so... yeah. Awesome, though!
Derision wrote to Vk3jed <=-
@VIA: VERT/AMIGAC
Re: Re: Mac's
By: Vk3jed to Derision on Sat Jun 23 2018 18:06:00
I used a CCD astro camera, basically a high sensitivity industrial webcam without a lens. It was fitted to the eyepiece tube, so that the CCD was placed at the focal point of the telescope.
I got good planetary pics, which is what the webcam style devices are best at - small, bright objects. Unfortunately, the telescope, while a reasonably good 6" reflector has a short focal length, which makes it better suited to wide field viewing of fainter objects, where light gathering power is more important than magnification. But the best camera for deep space objects is a DSLR (without a lens), and I've never owned a DSLR. :(
The best I got was some pictures of the moon... once, I got a slightly streaky Jupiter, but again, I had an awful telescope which would wobble
if you looked at it wrong, so... yeah. Awesome, though!
---
= Synchronet = Amiga City - The BBS for the Amiga - more than 2,500+ files
I remember doing that on my IBM-PC clone with SCSI termination... and I found it to be more reliable than the IDE form.
I've been experimenting with my Nikon D3300. http://bit.ly/2KhqT2w is a pic of a moon that I took with a full-manual 500 mm with a 2x converter.
It's only the second series of moon-shots I take. I live in South Louisiana and humidity is a real problem.
Nightfox wrote to Jazzy_J <=-
@VIA: VERT/DIGDIST
@TZ: c1e0
Re: Re: Mac's
By: Jazzy_J to Derision on Thu Jun 28 2018 06:19 am
I've been experimenting with my Nikon D3300. http://bit.ly/2KhqT2w is a pic of a moon that I took with a full-manual 500 mm with a 2x converter.
That's cool. I wouldn't mind taking some pics like that, though lenses can be pretty expensive.
It's only the second series of moon-shots I take. I live in South Louisiana and humidity is a real problem.
Humidity isn't as bad where I live. But I know what you mean - A
couple years ago I went to Texas and had my camera with me, and when I went outside, the lens would immediately fog up from the humidity. But after a few minutes, it can acclimate and the humidity on the lens can clear up.
Nightfox
---
= Synchronet = Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com
On 06-28-18 06:19, Jazzy_J wrote to Derision <=-
I've been experimenting with my Nikon D3300. http://bit.ly/2KhqT2w is a pic of a moon that I took with a full-manual 500 mm with a 2x
converter.
On 06-29-18 00:21, Jazzy_J wrote to Nightfox <=-
My next target is a variety of photos of the moon, but also deepsky. I saw the nebulae in Orion a long time ago with a telescope and was
amazed how relatively "big" it was. The problem is pulling in the
light well enough to see it.
I don't know if I have the equipment to pull it off, but I'm going to
give it a try.
Orion doesn't appear in the night sky until the winter, which we have a bit less humidity then and clearer skies, so I have some time to
practice.
I've wanted to shoot deep sky since I was a kid. We'll see if I can
pull it off.
Vk3jed wrote to Jazzy_J <=-
@VIA: VERT/FREEWAY
@TZ: 1258
On 06-28-18 06:19, Jazzy_J wrote to Derision <=-
I've been experimenting with my Nikon D3300. http://bit.ly/2KhqT2w is a pic of a moon that I took with a full-manual 500 mm with a 2x
converter.
Nice photo! :)
On 06-24-18 23:18, Boraxman wrote to Vk3jed <=-
... To an alligator, do we taste like chicken?
I had connected some old hard drives (about 250MB - 500MB) to a modern PC via a USB/IDA adapater and got some good speeds out of them. A 175MB hard drive that I connected this way could be backed up completely quite quickly.
We're talking about much older drives, a decade or more before IDE came about. :) You couldn't even connect these to a modern PC (I highly doubt anyone made an adapter for them :) ).
On 06/24/18, Nightfox said the following...
I guess that's true.. I forgot COM ports were serial ports. But there wa also the parallel port, which printers often used.
The problem with parallel is that as the clock rate on the port goes up it rapidly becomes impossible to keep the signals in sync over connectors and cables of unknown length or condition. Sure an 8-bit parallel interface is eight times faster than serial, up until you reach a couple MHz, at which point everything kind of falls apart.
On 06-29-18 12:13, Jazzy_J wrote to Vk3jed <=-
Thanks much. I have been wanting to do that for a long time. Thanks
for the advice about a telescope. It confirmed what I thought. I used
to have a 4 inch Newtonion a couple decades ago. In my current
physical state, I don't know if I could handle one, but it could be a needed physical challenge.
As far as rotation of the Earth... hah. In taking the photo of the
Moon, I took a timed series about 5 seconds apart. I was amazed at how fast the rotation was in just 5 seconds.
A tracking system will be mandatory.
Thanks again.
On 06-29-18 12:45, Digital Man wrote to Vk3jed <=-
The old MFM vs. RLL and ST-412/506 days. Fun times. :-)
The old MFM vs. RLL and ST-412/506 days. Fun times. :-)
I've been experimenting with my Nikon D3300. http://bit.ly/2KhqT2w is a pic of a moon that I took with a full-manual 500 mm with a 2x converter.
It's only the second series of moon-shots I take. I live in South Louisiana and humidity is a real problem.
Re: Re: Mac's
By: Digital Man to Vk3jed on Fri Jun 29 2018 12:45 pm
The old MFM vs. RLL and ST-412/506 days. Fun times. :-)
ESDI, Man!
Vk3jed wrote to Jazzy_J <=-
@VIA: VERT/FREEWAY
@TZ: 1258
On 06-29-18 12:13, Jazzy_J wrote to Vk3jed <=-
Thanks much. I have been wanting to do that for a long time. Thanks
for the advice about a telescope. It confirmed what I thought. I used
to have a 4 inch Newtonion a couple decades ago. In my current
physical state, I don't know if I could handle one, but it could be a needed physical challenge.
A 4 inch is still pretty small for DSOs, you will need long exposure
times to compensate. I have a 6 inch with short focal length, that I suspect is probably a minimum
As far as rotation of the Earth... hah. In taking the photo of the
Moon, I took a timed series about 5 seconds apart. I was amazed at how fast the rotation was in just 5 seconds.
Yeah. If you're imaging planets, you can cheat a little. Planetary imaging is best done by taking a video, then processing the frames of
the video to cancel out atmospheric distortions (which tend to cancel
over longer periods of time).
And you can track by hand, because the software knows to look for the bright planet somewhere in the frame. Doesn't matter if it jiggles
around a bit. :)
A tracking system will be mandatory.
Yes, that will make things much easier. :)
Thanks again.
You're welcome. :)
... Never assume the obvious is true!
--- MultiMail/Win v0.51
þ Synchronet þ Freeway BBS, Bendigo Australia. freeway.apana.org.au
danly wrote to Chai <=-
Google has a new OS in the works at the moment; I've personally got a machine that runs Haiku, and there are installations of ReactOS to be
| Sysop: | MCMLXXIX |
|---|---|
| Location: | Prospect, CT |
| Users: | 325 |
| Nodes: | 10 (0 / 10) |
| Uptime: | 31:45:37 |
| Calls: | 508 |
| Messages: | 220012 |
