HOME

Current View

VIEW Home
MAIL Home
BOOK Reviews
 
©
This week:
Monday
Tuesday
Wednesday
Thursday
Friday
Saturday
Sunday
 


 
Top

CHAOS MANOR MAIL

A SELECTION

Mail September 20 - 26, 1999

REFRESH/RELOAD EARLY AND OFTEN!

CLICK ON THE BLIMP TO SEND MAIL TO ME

The current page will always have the name currentmail.html and may be bookmarked. For previous weeks, go to the MAIL HOME PAGE.

Fair warning: some of those previous weeks can take a minute plus to download. After Mail 10, though, they're tamed down a bit.

IF YOU SEND MAIL it may be published; if you want it private SAY SO AT THE TOP of the mail. I try to respect confidences, but there is only me, and this is Chaos Manor. If you want a mail address other than the one from which you sent the mail to appear, PUT THAT AT THE END OF THE LETTER as a signature.

PLEASE DO NOT USE DEEP INDENTATION INCLUDING LAYERS OF BLOCK QUOTES IN MAIL. TABS in mail will also do deep indentations. Use with care or not at all.

I try to answer mail, but mostly I can't get to all of it. I read it all, although not always the instant it comes in. I do have books to write too...  I am reminded of H. P. Lovecraft who slowly starved to death while answering fan mail. 

If you want to send mail that will be published, you don't have to use the formatting instructions you will find when you click here but it will make my life simpler, and your chances of being published better..

This week:
Monday -- Tuesday -- Wednesday -- Thursday -- Friday -- Saturday -- Sunday

Current Mail

HIGHLIGHTS:

•  
• Finding the patent office
• Forry's not dead!
•  
• The Stupid rtf attachment
• Pegasus has rules
• The Long Boom
• Fixing Word
• Talin on mail servers
• So maybe it won't be Eudora: can't import
• Word 200 defended: SDI - MDI defined
  • Another pro-MDI
• Many readers love Mindspring
  • And more
• 1-888-686-9765
• One Dilemma Solved
• Office 2000 and Normal.dot
• Competing with Microsoft
• Is Earthlink/Mindspring good enough?
• Used at Chaos Manor
• Hire it all done?
• Come to the dark side
•  

©
Monday
Tuesday
Wednesday
Thursday
Friday
Saturday
Sunday
 
Top

Monday September 20, 1999

I got a lot up last night, if you didn't see it. I also got mail saying not to use this color. What is a good color to set off what is mine from other people's comments?

Here's a way to start the week:

Interesting to think about....

From:

A (mostly) daily journal of the trials, tribulations, and random observations of Robert Bruce Thompson, a writer of computer books.

Saturday, September 5^th-

Late Morning: Now here’s something truly frightening. CNET reports that Russian software used to run their strategic warning system is not Y2K compliant because they ran out of money. So, come 12/31/99, they’ll have about 2,500 thermonuclear warheads pointed at us and warning software that hasn’t even been tested, let alone debugged. We’ve lived with the possibility of being nuked intentionally for forty years now, and that’s terrifying enough. Somehow, the possibility of being nuked unintentionally is even worse to my mind. “Oh! Sorry, our mistake...”

The US has given Russia billions of dollars. I’ve said all along that instead of giving the money to them with no strings attached, we should trade them our money for their warheads. The problem, of course, is that Russia is barely a country at all nowadays. By most measures, it doesn’t even qualify as a third-world country. Fourth-world, perhaps. And with all of that, they cling with pride to the nuclear trinkets that once made them a superpower. Now that Russia is essentially ruled by various Mafya gangs and the government can no longer provide even such basics as potable water to the residents of their major cities, something needs to be done to remove these dangerous toys from their control.

I used to think that the Y2K fanatics who quit their jobs, sold their homes, and headed for the hills were over-reacting. Now I’m beginning to wonder.  2,500 nukes means that there are probably fifteen or twenty targetted on the Winston-Salem/Greensboro/High Point metro area, and all it takes is one. I can see it now. As we watch the ball drop in New York at midnight, the TV will die, the lights will go off, and then it’ll suddenly get very bright outside. I’m going to be seriously annoyed if that happens. I hope the Defense Secretary talks Russia into removing the distributor caps from their nukes.

Russia works to avoid nuke misfire on Y2K

By Reuters

Special to CNET News.com

September 2, 1999, 4 p.m. PT

URL: http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,41258,00.html

Robin Whitson

Not sure there is much to add to that... (Incidentally I don't much like bright red as it makes it stand out TOO much)

When I clicked on Help in Outlook 2000 when I was in the Inbox I was presented with the Assistant offering me help on [Checking for new messages] When I clicked on search I got the following - Check for new messages On the Tools menu, point to Send/Receive, and then click the e-mail account you want to send and receive from.

Learn about setting a time interval to check for messages.[-this is a hyperlink]

This went straight to it.

Took 2 seconds!!!!

Regards

Bryan Wetton

Adelaide SA

http://www.box.net.au/~bryanw/

‘A Southerner from the North’

What I don't like is that you have to hit is just right. I tried the index. Big mistake, They put the effort into making it "smart" but not indexing properly. Ah well.

Well, I was in a hotel room in Seattle, and connected at 2400 Baud, so I wasn't going to go looking. Leave it to the government to have URL's like that. I leave it to the reader to put them together again. Thanks. That is useful.

Jerry,

There ~must~ be a way to force IE5 to open new windows maximized, but I haven’t found any solution in my extensive poking around.  There’s no response to the question in news:microsoft.public.internetexplorer, and, locally at Sonic, all I’ve gotten in answer is “it’s a bug.”

Do you have any ideas?

Thanks.....S

Stuart Hofmann [stuart@sonic.net]

No idea, but I bet a reader knows. Thanks.

Granted, the name’s misspelled, but still:

http://www.findagrave.com/cemeteries/15.html

Check the very first name!

(From Joe Zeff)

Interesting. Actually the grave site shown is for Wendayne Ackerman, Forry's deceased wife, and one expects he has reservations there. Interesting site. Thanks. But Forry is quite alive and well, and laughed like hell during the Nasfic play as I recall...

Zelda Legends - The best Zelda site on the web!
E-Zone - Your source for online entertainment
Videomasters - Learn about the Videogaming World!
TSR: The Second Reel - Check out the latest in Hollywood!

^Starfox [starfox@rpgxtreme.com]

If one has the proper installation of Office 2000, then yes, the message boxes are there. Having gone through the day trying to figure out what those error messages mean I can tell you that to me, at least, they aren't clear; and if you have the wrong installation of Office 2000 there not only are not those messages, but no clue as to why they are not there. It took a reader to tell me.

If you disgust that easily I suspect you had better not read any more press releases.

Jerry - A suggestion (maybe) for you mailing list problems.  How about setting the subscriber list up on a site (free?) like egroups.com , where only you can  send messages, add/remove users, etc?

 Maybe the advertisements at the bottom of the messages that get sent out are not to your liking for the list, but it is a thought.

 Also (and this is not a complaint, just a request), if you get a chance could you make sure that the messages that you send out don't have receivers with the 'Send as Rich Text Format' in them?  I get an attachment to each email you sent today called 'WinMail.dat', which I believe is caused by this 'Send as Rich  Text' checkbox.

Mike Strock [mstrock@oz.net]

I have changed that; without the rtf box checked I can't apparently use WORD as the default mail editor, though. I think I have to go back to OUTLOOK 98 since this seems a very confused puppy. I want things to open in Word but they don't unless I use that rtf switch. In Outlook 98 they had an explicit "use word as the default editor" but I don't see it here. If I don't choose the "rtf" thing then I can't use Word without pasting into Word.

I am beginning to hate this.

From: Thomas Crook [tjcrook@email.com]

Subject: E-mail programs, Starswarm, EverQuest

Dear Jerry,

Sorry this is long, but I have three different items that may be of interest to you and your readers:

First, your reply to Pegasus mail advocate Dr. Krishnadath,

          Thanks, but I really do need the rules that Outlook gives me,

may leave people with the impression that Pegasus Mail does not incorporate mail handling rules; nothing could be further from the truth.

IMO, Pegasus has more powerful rule handling than Outlook. It also seems to be faster and more reliable and of course, it’s freeware.

It does have its drawbacks. Some people tell me they find it harder to use than Eudora and Outlook, although I don’t personally find it difficult. I suppose it depends on what one is used to.

A second drawback is that it is not strongly integrated with the other Microsoft applications you use, so I doubt you would find it a good fit for your environment.

Our University faculty has just switched from Pegasus to Novell Groupwise. From what I’ve experienced so far, Groupwise has the others beat for features and ease of use. Groupwise also has pretty decent integration with MS Office.

However, I still think Pegasus’ rules are more powerful.

Subject number two: my sons and I were browsing through the Galaxy Science Fiction bookshop here in Sydney and I noticed that they had just received copies of Starswarm. We of course bought one immediately. I enjoyed reading it. It’s refreshing and exciting to see a quality juvenile book in a market dominated by Goosebumps and its progeny. I can envision Heinlein’s ghost smiling over your shoulder as you wrote. My son Dan, 12, read the book in less than a day (and I think he’s already re-read it again). He hopes you will write another with the same characters. My other son, Greg, 10, is about halfway through the book and is also enjoying it. As for me, I look forward to the next Janissaries book—there’s a series that has lain dormant for too long.

Finally, in the games department, I haven’t seen a mention of EverQuest from you or your readers. It’s a compelling multiplayer online 3D game. After reading about it in Time magazine a couple of months ago my sons determined that they wanted a copy. They saved up their money and we bought the game last week. I am impressed. I usually only play computer games for a couple of weeks at Christmastime with the kids. Over the past week, I’ve found myself competing with the kids for game time. Usually, they’re begging me to play with them; now they’re begging me to get off. I’m sorely tempted to buy a second copy. Unlike some other online games, Everquest uses standard Internet protocols and can be run across a masquerading (aka proxy) server. I would love to run simultaneous sessions on both of our Win98 machines through our Linux server.

Regards,

Thomas Crook
http://www-personal.usyd.edu.au/~tomc
University of Sydney

Thanks. I will have to get Pegasus. Now I have to figure out where, but I know it is in here somewhere. It may well be better than Outlook. Outlook is sort of all right, but sometimes it drives me nuts.

Thanks for the kind words about Starswarm.

I don't know Everquest. Thanks

Jerry,

Here is an essay about the Long Boom that I think you might find interesting and thought-provoking. It neither dismisses the idea of the L.B. out of hand nor overlooks the social problems that might cause it to miscarry. As you say, 'recommended.'

http://econ161.berkeley.edu/Comments/long_boom.html

--Erich Schwarz

Thanks. I'll have a look.

©
Monday
Tuesday
Wednesday
Thursday
Friday
Saturday
Sunday
 
Top

Tuesday, September 21, 1999

One of our laptop users (who is here for a few days) had the very same problem. My first repair attempt worked - and actually, it's usually the first thing I try whenever I'm confronted with Word problems.

 What I did was:

 1) close Word

2) delete C:\Program Files\Microsoft Office\Templates\Normal.dot

3) open Word

 The weird text was now gone from files which had displayed it earlier.

I then opened a file which I'd tried earlier - and which had a lot of REAL garbage characters in it.  Then when I tried opening one of those problem files again, the extra text lines were back.

 So I closed Word, deleted the file with lots of garbage characters, deleted Normal.dot, and opened Word again.

 Once again the extraneous text lines were gone from the problem files.

So my best guess is that something in the garbaged file confused Word and caused it to corrupt the Normal template.

 I'll have that laptop's owner pound away at Word to see if the problem recurs, but I suspect it won't.

 Calvin Dodge

System Administrator

Biostar, Inc.

Thanks. I reinstalled Word, with odd results, as I have I think described in last week's View. I ascribed the problem to confusions in Word versions, but perhaps not. The file that blew things up was formatted in the O'Reilly template (which I hate) and that is very complicated; perhaps too much so for a laptop? But that doesn't seem reasonable, so I just don't know.

SUBJECT: Mass Mailings

 Jerry,

 I think that you might want to consider an alternative way of handling your mass mailings. In my experience, one generally doesn't use desktop mail client software to do mass mailings for >100 recipients - most of them simply aren't set up for it. For one thing, the user interfaces for handling the editing of that many recipient addresses is just too cumbersome.

 I realize of course that part of your goal is to see whether in fact what you are trying to do can be feasibly and efficiently done. But in this case I suspect that you'll only end up proving that it's not easy to use desktop mailing software for things which it was never designed to do in the first place.

 For large mailings, server-based mail programs are the most popular solution. This can consist of generalized mail transport agents such as sendmail or qmail, or specialized mailing list managers such as majordomo, ListStar, or ezmlm. These programs are usually executed on a mail server machine, that is a machine who's job it is (among other things) to receieve, process, and send email. If you don't happen to have a mail server of your own, there are a number of companies such as eGroups (http://www.egroups.com) and ONEList (http://www.onelist.com) which provide secure, publically accessable servers for hosting of mailing lists. The main disadvantage of these servers is that they put a two-line advertisment for their service at the bottom of each message. This is not a huge disadvantage - for example, my boss needed to set up a discussion list for representatives from various e-commerce companies to discuss potential e-commerce standards. Rather than having one of his own programmers set up a mailing list, he simply used eGroups.

 If you want to run your own server, there are mailing list managers for Unix, Windows and Mac. Mac makes a particularly good choice if ease of use is your goal - there are a number of powerful mailing list management applications which have sophisticated easy-to-use graphical interfaces. You could easily set up a spare Mac and run AIMS/AutoShare or Macjordomo (A Mac-GUI version of Majordomo). You could also use a Linux box for the same purpose - most of the standard distributions have sendmail already configured, and you would simply need to create an appropriate forwarding file (just a text file named ".forward" in your home directory) which contained the names of all recipients. Of course, the learning curve is a sharp one, but as long as you're not doing anything fancy there's really not much to it; not nearly as complex as setting up a web server for example. And since the ".forward" file is merely a text file of addresses with a few special characters inserted, converting from your existing format should be relatively simple. I don't know what's available for Windows and NT but I suspect that there is a wealth of choices available.

 In your case, you would want to configure things so that only you could post messages to the mailing list. This is easily done using most mailing list software, by declaring yourself the moderator of the list, which disallows any messages to be posted to the list until you have approved them.

 Once you have set up a mailing list server, each time you want to send a message, you simply compose the message in your normal email client, and then instead of mailing it to hundreds of individual recipients, you simply mail it to one recipient - the address of the mailing list. The mailing list manager then forwards the message to the individuals who are on that list. Most mailing list managers are smart enough to know about bounced messages and bad addressess, and will try hard to make sure that each mail goes to it's proper recipient - and if not, it keeps a logfile of failed attempts.

 Many mailing list managers, such as ezmlm, allow the list to be administrated via email as well as from the console. You can send commands in the subject line to subscribe, unsubscribe, moderate, list participants and other operations. Once you set it up, you need never actually touch the box again if you don't want to.

 One thing you could do is to maintain a number of seperate lists, each for a different type of subscriber. For example, it might be useful to have a "public" list that anyone can join, to recieve certain types of notifications from you, as well as the "private" lists used for subscribers.

 Of course, any of these solutions is going to involve some challenges. But I feel that solving these challenges and writing about them is going to be substantially more relevant and interesting to your readers than writing about how to coerce Outlook into managing large lists of names and Earthlink into accepting them.

 --  Talin (Talin@ACM.org)   "I am life's flame. Respect my name.

 www.sylvantech.com/~talin    My fire is red, my heart is gold.

 www.hackertourist.com/talin  Thy dreams can be...believe in me,

                              If you will let my wings unfold..."

                                -- Heather Alexander

  Thanks. Good summary. What I intend to do is see if Eudora, which seems to be a bit more sane about bad addresses, is also quicker so that Earthlink doesn't time out; and if that doesn't work, try Eudora with IBM.NET; and if that doesn't work, Pegasus and those two (I start with Eudora because I have it), and if that doesn't work I'll look to more drastic solutions. But yes, having a mail server service that maintains a list (revising it is harder than it is here in Outlook of course) makes a lot of sense. The problem really has been that I have been sort of interrupt driven and staggering from one solution to another. That isn't good. My life tends to be a series of interrupts except when I get to the beach to write. I don't suppose it will ever change much.

Just read the comments about Outlook vis a vis Eudora. So I went and downloaded the latest version of Eudora Pro 4.3...stupid program doesn't import from Outlook 2000 or OLE 5. Outlook 2000 I can understand, but OLE 5.0 has been around a LONNGGGG time! Uninstalled and trashed.

Hal Day

Uh-oh. So maybe I won't be using that one after all. I sure don't want to hand type in the list. Thanks.

Gentlemen,

 BYTE doesn't appear to have user discussion forums, so I am emailing this directly, with a Cc to Cameron Barrett (author of the superb http://www.camworld.com weblog) since he brought it to my attention.

 Word 2000's new SDI behavior does create a new root-level window for each open document, but it does not create a new instance of winword.exe - this is very important for resource consumption and inter-window communications.

 I can respect Paul's wish for an MDI option, but if this required Microsoft to incoporate two entirely distinct window managers, we would be complaining that much more about bloatware.

 Jerry says "the 'window' pulldown no longer switches among views, but actually calls up a new instance of Word overlaying the old," but this is inaccurate: Window does switch among views.  If you have several Word documents open and you choose one of them via Window, it will be brought to the foreground and given mouse/keyboard focus, precisely as happened in MDI. Window will never create a *new* instance of Word unless you specifically tell it to by selecting New.

 *** In fact, SDI is identical to MDI except that there is no enveloping "parent window" blocking the rest of your desktop. ***

 Paul and Jerry both complain about wasted real estate due to "duplicated" menus and toolbars.  All you have to do is float them!  Word lets you float menus and toolbars at will, and when you do, they are instanced only once - all open document windows share them.  Out of deference to Jerry's aversion to attachments, here is a GIF URL:

       http://ifolk.org/word2ksdi.gif

 that illustrates a document window environment with no "wastage."

 If Paul wrote his own toolbar app, then let him float it.  Many users like that better anyway.

 I am no Microsoft apologist, but readers rely on BYTE columnists to analyze stuff accurately and to know the features of the programs they're reviewing (especially when the review is negative).

 Having used MDI and SDI for many years (although nobody's a bigger SDI booster than Jerry! :) ) and having followed the Word beta through, I like the new design and think it makes sense.  Therefore I expect MS to change it again!

 Tom Neff tneff@panix.com

Several points here, but first, thanks for making it clear.

I understand Paul changed his editorial to reflect the fact that Word does not in fact open a new instance with each document opened; it DOES open a new little icon in the tray, but since that icon is small (and ugly compared to the old Word W) it's almost impossible to tell which one of the icons refers to which document that's open, so there might as well be only one.

The pull down "Window" does in fact list the documents and let you switch; but since it starts with the default of only one document name showing, and you have to do a second pull down to see the rest of them (part of the new helpfulness of Word) I made the mistake of thinking that it didn't have them at all and you had to hit the different icons.

Now I may one day get used to floating toolbars, but frankly, my first impression is sheer hatred. Look: I am a creative writer. I want my blasted word processor to look the same every time I use it, and when I switch windows I want the tools to be where I last saw them. I don't want them floating all over the screen, and when I put the document away I want the toolbars to vanish too. Perhaps that's just stubborn insistence on not having to adjust to new stuff.

My real objections to Word 2000 aren't just the SDI/MDI business. Mostly, I don't find that Word 2000 does anything I want done that Word 97 didn't do, while it does other things differently enough that it annoys me. That could change, but for the moment, I still see no reason to buy Office 2000 if you have Office 97.

©
Monday
Tuesday
Wednesday
Thursday
Friday
Saturday
Sunday
 
Top

Wednesday September 22, 1999

THIS ONE IS TYPICAL:

Dr. P,

Regarding your search for another ISP, I recommend Mindspring. I've been using it for dour years now, and have had so few problems I don't even think about my ISP anymore. Its just there.

Now, a couple of caveats: I live in Marietta, GA, an Atlanta suburb, and this is Mindspring's home turf. Thus, this network section was built from the ground up, not acquired. Second, I just surf with a dial-up account, nothing like what you do for us. But, there are sites (www.boortz.com, home of my favorite libertarian talk show host, for one) that take tens of thousands of hits a day, if not more, all hosted by Mindspring with nary a problem.

Thanks, and keep up the good work. I especially enjoy your thoughts and commentary on education. I'm the father of three small boys, the oldest about to be 5, and I'm concerned about their education. I'm a product of public schools, but I don't even recognize what they do these days. It certainly isn't what I did, and that was only in the 1970's.

Thanks,

Mark Bridgers

Download NeoPlanet at http://www.neoplanet.com

What the public schools do is make sure that those with the money to send their kids to private schools remain in the elite, and those who do not remain one down. This seems to be the purpose of the public school system: to weed out of the elites all those tom fool enough to send their children through them. They get a lot of dedicated teachers to break their hearts, but the system is set so that it is all but impossible to get a decent education in the public schools. Here and there are exceptions. I am most familiar with Washington DC (where the Congress has the authority to make this a showplace if they wanted to, and since they don't, it is clear they LIKE the results there) and California, which one had a school system to be very proud of, and now is the pits.

Bad schools perpetuate class differences, and build castes from classes. Alas.

And now something different:

It's [part of a previous discussion] more of a problem with the perceptions of the public.  We spent so much time and money convincing people that seat belts are a Good Thing that they don't understand that they can be a Bad Thing on a school bus.

 Never mind how fast the side of the belt with the buckle on it would be sliced off and become the lowest common denominator in weapons for the younger set in the inner city.  (They used to steal the safety chains from the emergency exists of the school bus that I drove many years ago.  A locker inspection when I mentioned them vanishing to a school official turned up 17 safety chains in lockers, all lockers of gang members.  I guess chains are tame now, it was another age.)  The real problem is that kids in a collision tend to jacknife when restrained only by a belt, and NTSB tests done in the 70's showed an increase in total injuries,  head injuries, pelvic injuries, and serious injuries when belts were used.  Belts turned minor accidents with a couple of split lips into serious accidents.

 The idea keeps coming back.  The money for the studies, the redesign, the new standards, and the more expensive new school bus that will result will indeed save lives.  It just won't save the lives of those few who are killed or injured each year with the current standards.  Instead it will save the lives that would be lost if the well-meaning fuggheads got seat belts installed.

Re: Mindspring

They have been absolutely fantastic for the last 3 years for me, even on those occasions when I've had to call Customer Service, that being the place where many providers fall over -- they're pretty good looking until you need help.

MS isn't like that.

Just one thing: make _sure_ you're on a Mindspring constructed POP, not one they've bought from some other network operator. They're still having a spot of trouble integrating all those other one to their standards. They're pretty good about telling you which are which, though.

Cheers, -- jra

Dear Mr. Pournelle,

For me I like the new SDI windows for Word 2000. This is because I use the multiple monitors. With SDI windows I can drag documents into separate monitors. With MDI applications you can't do this easily without starting up a whole new instance of the problem. For example in Visual Basic I always selected the SDI option because I have the application running on one monitor and the code on another.

With Word 2000, the new SDI interface saves me memory because each SDI windows uses less resources than each new instance of Word 97.

Also I like the SDI interface because it allows me to use alt-tab to switch between different document. This is more natural to me than the MDI method.

I greatly enjoy the use of multiple monitors and welcome any application that makes it easy to use them. Windows 98 makes it easy to setup your system to use multiple monitors and I think that more and more users will have them. Your old saying about one user - multiple processor should be amended to one user - multiple processors - multiple monitors.

Robert Conley

You have a point, and thanks. I still like one BIG monitor, but that's me.

> 1-888-686-9765

> So my question is, how does this joker make any money?

If each of your readers calls the number ONCE (maybe from a pay phone: caller ID works on all 800 numbers, even if you use caller ID blocking), sets the phone down 'till the recording plays out, and hangs up, he won't. <grin>

Rich Brown -- rabmar@FreeMars.org -- www.FreeMars.org

Now, now, I am sure that it would be illegal for me to suggest that anyone do that...

©
Monday
Tuesday
Wednesday
Thursday
Friday
Saturday
Sunday
 
Top

Thursday September 23, 1999

Jerry,

In light of your recent remarks about your ISP, I attach the following,

which by now you may have already seen:

http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/19990923/bs/earthlink_mindspring_1.html

Yahoo! News

Microsoft Word in Office 2000.

In the process of upgrading my entire site to Office 2000, we have been puzzled by the totally random approach the software has made to basic functions, such as macros for "new memo", "new CEO letter" etc.

What we've learnt is that O2K creates a brand new normal.dot, which ignores all existing normal.dot facilities, and further, ignores the location of templates set in the "options" menu.

One must delete the brand new Microsoft version of normal.dot in the Office directory under program files / Microsoft Office. The new software permits multiple normal.dot's, and acts upon them in a hierarchy, very poorly.

IanC/OZ

What I would greatly appreciate is a good account of why you upgraded, and what it is you get for doing it. This isn't a trick question.

©
Monday
Tuesday
Wednesday
Thursday
Friday
Saturday
Sunday
 
Top

Friday September 24, 1999

Dr. Pournelle,

Just for the record, Mindspring *USED* to be the absolute finest ISP in the world. They also used to be a really great company to work for and do business with. All of this was before they decided to become a national ISP, when they were in Atlanta only.

Then at some point, they got too big for their britches (for lack of a better phrase). They decided to go national. They decided to ignore the technically proficent user that got them where they were. They began to try to compete with AOL and other services for "the masses." So gradually they became just as bad as AOL, and Netcom and all the others (including ATT, IBM, et cetera, ad nauseum).

They also sacrificed the ethics and standards that made me want to do business with them in the first place. Mindspring is based in Atlanta; I know lots of people who worked there. They tried to live by the "Core Values" that Mindspring used to tout so highly, and were to a one run out of the company because of it.

The worst thing is that Mindspring is STILL comparatively better than any other ISP, but the standard is so low that it doesn't satisfy me (or a lot of other people). If I could find a better ISP I would switch instantly. So would most of the "technical" people I associate with. There isn't a better ISP though.

As for Earthlink they have technical problems galore which is why I don't use them. Additionally, Earthlink was acquired by Mindspring today.

Just wanted to add my two cents, I guess.

Yours Truly,

Preston A. Rickwood, Atlanta, Georgia

Actually, I think Earthlink acquired Mindspring. Anyway, I have found them all about the same, actually, but I'm going to be testing IBM.NET for a while. Meanwhile, meanwhile, pair.com is truncating my stuff and telling me it's not their fault it's mine. This on files that worked for YEARS and have not been altered, and suddenly can't be transmitted properly. Feh!

©
Monday
Tuesday
Wednesday
Thursday
Friday
Saturday
Sunday
 
Top

Saturday September 25, 1999

Things are still being truncated; see view on that score. It has now been decided that there is some mind of interaction between Raven and Apache, whatever those are.

I got a bit frustrated. This came in reply to that.

Jerry,

I've been a fan of your column in BYTE for years, and I'm glad you managed to keep something going when the magazine folded.

Being a computer programmer / hardware / network / support person, I understand everything you go through with computers. Sometimes I get so frustrated that I want to simply move to Maine, grow potatoes, and have the government pay me to push them off a cliff into the ocean with a bulldozer.

You keep saying "I do these things so you don't ahve to.". For me, it goes "Pournelle does those things so I can do other things instead."

After reading what you said about help files in the latest View, I think you need to know how I think it is done.

Hardware: The original documentation is written in the native language (Chinese, Japanese, etc.), then translated to English by someone who does not quite undertand either language. It is then printed on a small, folding, easy to lose piece of paper. The title of this paper is "BASIC I/O CARD INSTRUCTIONS", with no brand name. After a few years, you have several different types of these cards, and it takes a half hour to match a card to its documentation. Longer if there are no drawings of the card on the paper.

Software: The help file is written to tell you everything that the program can do, but must not under any circumstances tell you exactly where to go (menu, option, setting) in order to make it happen. This is because the person who wrote the help file never actually used the program, but was just told about its features.

Tech Support: The people who answer the call look in the help file. When they realize that you are not an idiot trying to do something simple, they look in the in-house database that we are never allowed to access. (Sometimes I think they just put you on hold and yell out "Hey! Anyone know how to ...?".) When the answer is not found there, they tell you they will have to "escalate" the call, and they want your credit card number to bill you. This is the point where most people hang up and then start browsing the web. The answer may be out there, but all too often you get distracted by something you stumbled across, switch web sites, follow other interesting subjects, then realize six hours later that you never did solve the original problem.

When all else fails, you must switch to a DOS prompt and type the following:

CD\WINDOWS DELTREE -Y *.*

Then locate your old copies of DOS 6 and WIndows 3.1 and start over with something that works.

Chris

... You can have it right, or you can have it now. Right now is not an option. ...

Which in fact makes me feel better. Thanks, Chris. And there is also this on help files:

Jerry,

Man is not meant to actually read help files.

Try banging the top of the computer with your fist, it won't fix the problem, but you'll feel a lot better!

Seriously, you've got to find a better way of getting your page up. California is one of the most technologically advanced areas of the world, for goodness sake! You MUST be able to get better than a phone line! Whatever happened to the ISDN line Byte put in?

By the way, I can download all images on your site with no trouble (I have ADSL) no truncation of any file is apparent to these tired eyes! Either with IE5, Netscape 4.6, Opera or Neoplanet!

On a side note, we suffered from a very high force windstorm, which blew a maple tree on top of some cars and is blocking the road I live on. The City of Vancouver has sent in three trucks to trim the branches of the trees around the fallen one! They say it is not their department to cut up fallen trees! Only to prune the trees from around the power lines. How's that for bureaucracy?

Best wishes!

Bill Grigg

The problem with ISDN is that it charges by the minute here, and that can get far too expensive. We are waiting for DSL to get a relay closer to my house. I'll go with that when it can happen. But the one thing I do not want to do is have to host my own site; I would rather pay someone money to do that. I may host something smaller and less critical -- I own several other domain names -- when I get a faster connection, but until then, I need a service provider...

Hi Jerry,

As a writer and a long time fan, I know you're busy.... so this is a terse note..... thanks for your time!

More years ago than either of us would care to admit, you praised the Honeywell mouse... with no ball, it never needed cleaning, it didn't need a mousepad. At over $50 each, I didn't get one, though I was tempted. Then Honeywell stopped making them and I thought they'd vanished.

It seems that Keytronics makes and sells them as their "Lifetime mouse". The online pictures sure do look the same. Buy.com seems to have them for $26 each. If I hadn't fallen in love with my Logitech Marble, I'd get one of the Lifetime mice.

A few days ago I got a note from Roton, and was delighted to see that they are continuing with testing the rotary rocket. Hovering isn't quite the same thing as earth orbit, but it's certainly a step in the right direction. It reassures me that they haven't given up on the rotary rocket.

As to the mercenaries - will there be another Jannisaries book?

Thanks, and best wishes, Mike

Thank you. I may get a couple of those although I rather like that Air Mouse too. I guess I am more tolerant of different rodentia than I used to be. 

©
Monday
Tuesday
Wednesday
Thursday
Friday
Saturday
Sunday
 
Top

Sunday September 26, 1999

 rueger@synapse.net

Hi Jerry -

Reading your trials and tribulations with pair.net this week cause me to sit down and look at how I'm using my time. I suddenly realized that for the last couple months I've been spending at least one day each week just solving computer problems. A half a dozen Win 98 systems are causing me that much grief??

Yup - by the time I download Windows and other updates and bug fixes, refresh virus signatures and try to solve the seemingly endless quirks that Win 98 has brought to me, I'm spending at least eight or ten hours a week on this stuff.

Computer problems - and their solutions - are no longer obvious. I spend far too much time chasing random crashes and other annoying, important, yet non-consistent problems. Or reinstalling software (and the corresponding patches and updates) to try and figure out where the problem came from. I know that somewhere, somehow, our sound editing applications are conflicting with something in Win 98. They worked fine under Win 95, but now they have quirky problems.

Helps files offer no solutions, Microsoft's website never has an answer to any question unless it's buried in some obscure place. The software company is trying to help, but can't offer too much when the symptoms are: "sometimes it crashes right at the end of playing a file".

Now, I love playing with computers, but this is not my job! I just happen to be the only person around who can fix things.

I decided to try Linux, and have spent many hours with both the Debian and Caldera distributions. From following your adventures I knew that this was not going to be easy. I was right.

I started by downloading Debian install disks from a website, and going the absolutely free route. I liked it, except that downloading the rest of what was needed (apparently 100+ megs) over a 28k modem just wasn't feasible. I then bought the Caldera package. Certainly the CD makes things faster and easier, but there are still many problems.

Unfortunately, finding answers to Linux problems is hard. Despite what the Linux publicists say, Man pages and newsgroups are a really inefficient resource. The people who write these things seem to forget entirely that there will be newcomers who don't already know the arcana of Linux. I can't count the number of times that a person asked a basic question in one of the Linux newsgroups, and indicated that they were new enough not to know what's happening, only to get hit with either "Oh just read the man pages" or something obscure like: "Oh that's easy just untar the file and install a new Xserver for your S3 video card. Probably stick it in /opt or /etc."

At which point the newcomer discovers that they now have another dozen things that they don't understand....

I will persevere with Linux, and can see the strengths. I truly believe that (if they ever get decent apps) it could take on Windows. I would switch tomorrow if I could just make the damn thing work! I think the Linux folks have got to learn some humility, and remember that not everyone is a graduate in computer science.

Right now the equation seems simple: If I go Linux I have to spend several more months learning enough obscure stuff to install and configure it successfully. If I go Windows it will install in 20 minutes but I get to spend the rest of my life tracking down and fixing obscure bugs.

Some choice.

In all of this I keep finding that the answers I need are almost always somewhere on your website. I truly look forward to the day when you add a search engine so that I can figure out which of the previous 67 weeks (times two for Mail and View) had the answer! As well as being entertaining, your site has become one of the best computer resources I know.

Thanks again.

Barry Rueger

Thanks for the kind words. My experience has been that Microsoft eventually fixes the problem (sometimes the hardware gets so much better that the problem goes away with minimal fixing) but then brings out something new and "better" which will have more problems. But so long as you are willing to stay with Microsoft stuff that has been around long enough for their quality assurance testers -- read early paying customers -- to have made their reports and their bug fixers to fix it, you will eventually be all right. 

The danger is in trying to stay with the latest with Microsoft.

Also, the Linux/Unix community has some of the brightest people I know. Their signals alas get lost in a flood of Micro$oft Windoze bashing, technical jargon to demonstrate the user's knowledge of the jargon, wizardry for the same purpose, and general madness. The best way to learn Linux is to get a Linux guru over, feed him and buy him lots of coke, and just get him to stand around as you try to use it. You'll make mistakes. Make him tell you how to fix them. Do it yourself. Don't let him do it or you will never learn what is going on.

Same with Windows 2000. With NT 4 though there are good third party books. Same on Office 97: there are good books. There aren't any for Office 2000, at least not yet. (There are books on 2000 you MUST HAVE but they aren't all that good; they're just all there is.)

In the present case my problems were compounded because the server people simply would not believe that my problem was not local, and kept offering things I ought to do locally. It was almost impossible to get them to believe that others were reporting the problems, using all kinds of browsers and ISP connections, so it HAD TO BE THEM. Eventually they realized it but by then it was apparently too late to change servers until Monday (they must not have physical access to their own machinery? Or they just don't think it is important enough?)

I confess I am getting very weary of all this. Writing books is a lot easier. And more lucrative.

Thanks for the kind words.

Your problems (and my own) with ISP's make me realize that ISP's have become like cell phone services. You can't live without them, but none of them are any good.

Here in Atlanta, there are at least half-a-dozen cell phone providers (BellSouth Mobility, Sprint, AT&;T, Powertel, NexTel, SouthernLinc, just off the top of my head). I know people who use or used all of them. No one is happy with their provider, no one says "they're great - no dropped calls, no 'system busy' messages, you really ought to be on this system." No, what you hear is "Yeah, X is a little better than Y", or conversely.

The selection criteria when changing providers is "are these new guys going to stink less than the guys I'm using now?" And I really wanted to use another "S"-word that's less flattering in the preceding sentence.

I think the parallels to ISP's are obvious. Both of these services are victims of their own success. Quality of Service has taken a back seat to taking the last nickel out of operating costs. The result is that people who care about such things are left with nowhere to go. You'd gladly pay a reasonable premium for QoS, but there's no one out there to take your money.

Surely there's a niche market out there for high QoS ISP's and cellular service? I guess everyone has their eye focused on the big mass-market target.

Thanks,

Jim Riticher jritiche@bellsouth.net

Yeah. When I look around I find Earthlink is about as good as any, and better than a lot, and at least it is nearly universal. IBM may be a little mo better, but it's a lot more complex to get connected to. Ah well.

Dr. Pournelle,

Two reasons why tech support in the computer/Internet/networking industry is terrible:

1) Most tech support people have zero to minimal experience, and they are paid accordingly. When one of these people gains experience, they move on to any job that (A) pays better money and (B) has opportunity for job satisfaction and advancement and (C) does not involve talking to irate people 8 hours a day. Ever notice that people in tech support jobs are often clueless? Look at it this way: If they HAD a clue, they would get a BETTER job!

2) Providing good tech support means spending a lot of money to make a small percentage of your customers happy. I'm convinced that many companies believe that the return on providing good tech support does not justify the cost.

It is easier to learn the systems and fix them yourself than to phone tech support. "Feh" is a very good word to describe the situation.

John Sloan

You have described the usual but not the inevitable. Earthlink has some fairly senior tech support people who are patient and helpful (and not just with me). One of them does tell tales about his experiences at the LASFS, but he never gives a clue as to who the person with the lame problem was, and I suspect that by having a place to tell these stories to a sympathetic audience he manages to get rid of a lot of the tension. Some people can make a pretty good career in tech support; but I agree, most companies don't understand that in order to keep decent people they have to pay them and give them some kind of career path, and most don't.

In general, though, it's best to use tech support as a teacher; learn to do it yourself. Or watch this space because

"I do all these silly things so you won't have to..."

SUBJECT: Book Review - "Gates of Fire" by Steven Pressfield

"Gates of Fire" is a novelization of the battle at the Hot Gates of Thermopylae in 480 B.C.

I find historical novels, if they are accurate and well-written, to be not only enjoyable but useful. I like history, but I have trouble slogging through straight, historical non-fiction, especially when it covers a period with which I am unfamiliar. I find that a good novel dealing with a particular era can aquaint me well enough with the dramatic themes and character of an era, so as to breathe life into the dry, factual details and make even the dry historical books more interesting. Of course, there's always the danger that I may get so caught up in a particular interpretation or author's vision as to miss the real truth behind it, which is why it's important to choose historical novels with some care.

So when I was in Pendragon books the other day, I noticed this novel dealing with the defense of the 300 Spartans against the massive slave armies of the Persians - an event which I had heard about from both Jerry P. and from reading Joseph Campbell. (In Campbell's "Courtly Love and the Grail", a series of cassete tape lectures, he calls this battle the "defining moment" of the Hellenic age.) Naturally, I picked up a copy.

The novel is told from the point of view of a Spartan squire named Xeones, the only survivor of the battle, who lay dying of his wounds while in Persian captivity. The Persian King, Xerxes, is interested in learning more about these Spartans and why they fought as they did. Xeones dictates his tale to the king's scribe, and tells not only about this battle, but about Spartan culture, Spartan training, about other battles he has seen, about the feeling of brotherhood between warriors, about how he came to Sparta after his own city had been destroyed by a rival.

Although I found the "story within a story within a story" format to be a little disconcerting at first, the narrative gradually smooths out and improves as the book progresses. I throught that the story was well-written, although occasionally I was slightly jolted by what I considered to be a few awkward anachronisms in the language used in the descriptions (such as describing a slave's robe as "altar-boy white"). For the most part, the author's use of language is artful and rendered with care. The book starts out a bit slow, but the climax builds to a deeply moving crescendo.

A lot of the book probes into both the methods and the psychology of warfare. "War is work" says the Spartan platoon leader Dienekes, who's goal in saying this is to demystify warfare, and insure that his troops approach the battle with calm and reasoned spirits - neither in fear nor battle-lust. I got the same sort of experience from reading this book, and it's treatment of the emotions of a warrior, as I got in Elizabeth Moon's excellent "The Deed Of Paksennarion".

I lack the expertise to say how historically accurate the book is, although the author does cite a lot of historical sources, both ancient and modern, in the afterword. Taken as a novel, it's one of the best bits of military fiction I've read. I tend not to be interested in battle for battle's sake (I found Tom Clancy's "Red Storm Rising" to be excruciatingly dull, to name just one example), but the author has done a creditable job making not only the action but the characters interesting and entertaining.

-- Talin (Talin@ACM.org)  "I am life's flame. Respect my name.

 www.sylvantech.com/~talin  My fire is red, my heart is gold.

 www.hackertourist.com/talin  Thy dreams can be...believe in me,

                                                 If you will let my wings unfold..." 

-- Heather Alexander

An excellent book, and I can add nothing to that review. Thanks! I should have reviewed the book earlier, and I have it on the list as a book of the month; in fact I thought I had made it one. I encountered it when I spoke at the Ashbrook Institute last spring. Anyway, thanks!

Subject: Monopoly, specifically Microsoft's alleged illegal OS tactics

From: Stephen M. St. Onge

Perhaps the subject is considered closed, but I think the most interesting comment of the exchange is in the last message posted:

"The problem is we get to talking in lawyer space rather than technical space or ethical space. ... I chose a DOS machine all those many years ago because of Apple’s insistence that I needed an expensive machine with graphic capabilities beyond my desires. Whatever they decided I needed they would give me and if it wasn’t there, I really didn’t need it. So Microsoft flourished, with most of us occasionally buying the OS, but the rest copying it at will. Cheap hardware and essentially free OS made a deadly combination."

Talking in "ethical and technical space', it sounds like lots of people found MS-DOS to be a good enough product, especially when they could steal it, and that Microsoft, once it had enough market share, found a way to make people pay for the OS -- have the OE manufacturer put it in the computer. I don't see anything unethical about that, and I don't see any technical issues either way. Talking in 'business space,' it sounds like strategy to me, very damn good strategy. So what? If somebody wanted to compete with Microsoft, they could have made their allegedly superior OS available free or very cheap, and once they had a big enough share, get the OEMs to install it with the same deal Microsoft had. The only unethical part of the Microsoft strategy I can see is if the original liscensing deal specified that anyone bundling DOS or Windows with the computer wasn't allowed to throw in other OSes. If so, that would be a legitimate anti-trust complaint, which Microsoft would presumably wriggle out of with a consent decree: 'we agree to drop that requirement.'

As for the original complaint (a deliberate code to crash DR DOS in the beta Windows), that does sound like some idiot's deliberate attempt at sabotage. However, it wasn't in the version that shipped, and Microsoft said it wouldn't be in the version that shipped -- in other words, they chickened out. And Digital Research had a patch available for the beta version of Windows anyway. So what?

Now, how about if somebody out there stops whining about how 'Micro$oft produces technically inferior products that their Windoze monopoly makes invulnerable,' and gets down to the hard work of producing an OS that I and other users find superior? Not that I'm holding my breath.

Well said.

Jerry,

I just went through an incident similar to your pair.com problem.

The company I work for sells Point-of-sale programs for retail stores (motorcyle, marine, automobile). For the past couple of months, I've been trying to get a credit card verifier to work. The problem was that my program would tell the credit card program to call out on the modem to verify the card, then something would time out and my program would report that the card didn't go through, even though the credit card program was still on the phone.

I was assured by the company that wrote our compiler that it was not their problem. Many times they told me this. I looked on the web for DDE TIMEOUT (since DDE is the method I'm using to make the programs talk to each other) and found other programs that let you set a timeout.

They finally had a programmer look at their code and say, "Yes, we found it. There is a setting. We hard coded it into the program, and someone changed it. We don't know why.". They then fixed it and sent me a copy. Everything works fine now.

The reason no one else had the problem: Most DDE calls are to a program like WORD or EXCELL that returns data in about a 1/2 second flat. Waiting for a program to dial out, do modem communications, then return something is not normal.

There should be some kind of law that states that "Whenever a representative of a company states that said company is not a source of a problem, without attempting to verify this for a fact, and it is later proven that said company is in fact responsible, said representative shall personally travel to the customer who reported the problem and apologize in person. Furthermore, said representative shall be personally responsible for compensating said customer for all revenue lost, wages paid, and any other expenses directly related to the customer's effort required to prove that the problem is in fact the company's and not the customer's."

Maybe this would get them resolve to problems faster. I'm no expert on this, but I have the feeling that something like this would not happen in Japan, because the company would be afraid of losing face when proven wrong.

Chris (ckeavy@yahoo.com)

Good story. Perhaps the remedy is a bit drastic, but it's in the right direction. Thanks!

Jerry,

Your comments about Earthlink alarm me. I was a Netcom user; recently it was acquired by Mindspring. Now I get an almost whiney email from the Mindspring CEO, about how they are merging with Earthlink, but the new company will be called Earthlink.

My fifteen-year old daughter devoured and enjoyed Starswarm (the hardcover!) Very nicely done; thanks.

While I'm on the line - have you ever felt as I do that Microsoft has an employee with the task of ensuring that, regardless of increases in PC speed, Windows still comes up as slowly as ever? Do they really think no one cares about this?

Thanks-

Larry Anthony

Actually, I conclude from letters I get that Earthlink is as good as any and better than most. The best isn't really as good as I would like, but I guess there's not much to be done about that. Thanks for the kind words about Starswarm.

Scott La Pidus (AScottLP@aol.com)

Software used (and maybe recommended) at Chaos manor 11f

Jerry,

Why don't you create something like "used and recommended at chaos manor" for software? I realize you spend lots of time in the view on software, and I do not necessarily mean big things like Windows 2000 or Frontpage. Why don't you set-up a page and list the software that you use that makes life easier e.g. memturbo, Norton and Mijenix, the download program you use, etc. I realize that you are busy, so you could just add new things to the web page as you think of or use them (even a line about why you use each would be a start). This page would be helpful for people new to the view, and for those of us who do not have a need for something when you mention it, but might later.

Starswarm was wonderful. It was the first (solo) book of yours I've read. I don't read much military SF so here is a plea for more non-military SF from you (especially in the Starswarm vein).

Scott

Actually we have something very like that already. I don't update it as often as I should. I'll try. And Bob Thompson and I are doing the Chaos Manor Hardware Guide for O'Reilly.

Jerry,

I have been feeling sorry for you over the ISP/Outlook/Front Page problems. I'm beginning to wonder if you are concentrating on your areas of strength. Perhaps you should have someone else set up a web site where you can just send text or photos by FTP. And have someone else set up a listserv for you that manages your email list. Then you can get back to more harware and new software tire-kicking and reporting.

Brent

Believe me, if there were an easy way to do that, I would. I try to keep things simple here. Originally I wanted the experience of doing much of it myself. Well, now I have had that experience. I have also found that it doesn't matter if you pay money, you'll still be doing much of it yourself. I expect Microsoft over time to clean up a good part of the mess -- making things easier for users is sort of what they do, and while they don't always manage it, that's at least what they try to do, as opposed to those who want to provide job security to gurus and wizards -- but it is taking an unholy time to do it. The Net is a bit time sink. Worse than I ever thought it would be.

Ah well.

Regarding: "My real objections to Word 2000 aren't just the SDI/MDI business. Mostly, I don't find that Word 2000 does anything I want done that Word 97 didn't do, while it does other things differently enough that it annoys me. That could change, but for the moment, I still see no reason to buy Office 2000 if you have Office 97."

Come over to the "Dark Side," and join the power users who prefer WordPerfect. Microsoft with Word 2000 produced a half-baked attempt to emulate WordPerfect's document bar, which enables one to switch between documents easily. WordPerfect allows that, while maintaining one set of menus and toolbars. And touch-typers do not have to use the mouse to do everything, either. Try it.

I won't even get into the (literally) 100 times greater precision WordPerfect allows versus Word, or the joys of knowing *exactly* what formatting codes are being applied and where, or any of hundreds of other advantages WordPerfect has over Word. 

-- Michael A. Koenecke Attorney and Counselor Dallas, Texas

Well I understand that many attorneys use Word Perfect anyway. And I just got a new Linux box from Rebel. I'll be setting up Word Perfect on that. And Star Office

I have to stay compatible with Word because that's what most of my collaborators use, and while some of them can learn something new, life isn't long enough for me to get Niven to learn a new word processor. And he likes white letters on blue.

©
Chaos Manor home

Entire contents copyright 1999 by Jerry E. Pournelle. All rights reserved.
Comments and discussion welcome.