Difference between revisions of "User talk:Larsbrinkhoff"
From Computer History Wiki
(Will move; comments on image) |
(→Chaosnet application protocols glitch: Did you miss this?) |
||
| (11 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown) | |||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
Please remember to sign them! :-) Thanks! [[User:Jnc|Jnc]] ([[User talk:Jnc|talk]]) 13:56, 9 July 2019 (CEST) | Please remember to sign them! :-) Thanks! [[User:Jnc|Jnc]] ([[User talk:Jnc|talk]]) 13:56, 9 July 2019 (CEST) | ||
| − | == | + | ==Contacting me== |
| − | + | hey just saw your messages as I was about to go on an A/UX binge. Also the emacs stuff. You can email me directly neozeed <at> GOOG .... you know gmail <dot> com... | |
| + | [[User:Neozeed|neozeed]] ([[User talk:Neozeed|talk]]) 06:42, 8 September 2021 (CEST) | ||
| − | + | ==Autopatrolled== | |
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | + | I was going to try and turn on [[Special:ListGroupRights|Autopatrolled]] for you, so I don't have to do that for your edits, but apparently as a mere 'administrator' I can't do that, only 'bureaucrats' can. Maybe I'll drop Tore a line, and ask him to do it. (I think as a mere 'user' you can't see the 'unpatrolled edit' marker in [[Special:RecentChanges]]; ISTR I did an experiment from another non-admin account - my wife's - to check if they showed up.) | |
| − | : I | + | PS: I loved the 'meow' - took me a few moments to get it! [[User:Jnc|Jnc]] ([[User talk:Jnc|talk]]) 14:24, 28 April 2022 (CEST) |
| − | |||
| − | : | + | : No, I had no idea there was such as thing as "autopatrol", and I never before saw that list of group rights. By all means, if it's any trouble have any appropriates properties turned on. [[User:Larsbrinkhoff|Larsbrinkhoff]] ([[User talk:Larsbrinkhoff|talk]]) 19:19, 28 April 2022 (CEST) |
| − | + | == Gordon Bell oral history == | |
| − | + | I dunno if you've ever read his oral history thing the CHM did, but it's worth reading; I just linked it in, at [[C. Gordon Bell]]. [[User:Jnc|Jnc]] ([[User talk:Jnc|talk]]) 15:21, 6 April 2023 (CEST) | |
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | + | == Not individual models == | |
| − | + | Not individual models - there are hundreds of them! We'd be here all year! So only tag [[PDP-11]] with [[:Category:16-bit Computers]], not [[PDP-11/20]], [[PDP-11/45]], etc. Unless there's a good reason to do individual models? (I can't think of one off the top of my head, but there might be.) [[User:Jnc|Jnc]] ([[User talk:Jnc|talk]]) 13:55, 11 July 2023 (CEST) | |
| − | |||
| − | : | + | : Sure. I wasn't going to touch the PDP-11s. At least not today. I did go through the PDP-8's, but they aren't as plentiful. [[User:Larsbrinkhoff|Larsbrinkhoff]] ([[User talk:Larsbrinkhoff|talk]]) 13:57, 11 July 2023 (CEST) |
| − | :: | + | :: There are also all the VAXen. I thought we had individual pages for some [[IBM System/360]] models, but apparently not. We do have [[KA10]], etc, of course. [[User:Jnc|Jnc]] ([[User talk:Jnc|talk]]) 14:32, 11 July 2023 (CEST) |
| − | :: | + | ::: The KA10 is arguably a processor, not a full computer. Maybe the categories should cover processors and architectures too, but I'm not in a hurry to do that now. But e.g. microprocessors like 4004, 8080, 6502 ought to have a place in this. [[User:Larsbrinkhoff|Larsbrinkhoff]] ([[User talk:Larsbrinkhoff|talk]]) 15:24, 11 July 2023 (CEST) |
| + | |||
| + | :::: Well, true, technically the KA10 is a processor - but we don't have pages for the KA10 ''models'', like the 1040. So [[KA10]] is kind of a stand-in for them (in not being categorized). | ||
| + | :::: Yes, micros should be covered too. But again, as you suggest, architectures/lines, not models. So [[Motorola M68000 Family]] goes in [[:Category:32-bit Computers]], but not [[Motorola MC68000]]. I will write a few words someplace to formalize this - once I figure out what the right place is! [[User:Jnc|Jnc]] ([[User talk:Jnc|talk]]) 18:29, 11 July 2023 (CEST) | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==Chaosnet application protocols glitch?== | ||
| + | |||
| + | Did you miss [[Talk:List of Chaosnet application protocols|this]]? [[User:Jnc|Jnc]] ([[User talk:Jnc|talk]]) 22:54, 16 October 2023 (CEST) | ||
Latest revision as of 21:54, 16 October 2023
Contents
Talk: page entries
Please remember to sign them! :-) Thanks! Jnc (talk) 13:56, 9 July 2019 (CEST)
Contacting me
hey just saw your messages as I was about to go on an A/UX binge. Also the emacs stuff. You can email me directly neozeed <at> GOOG .... you know gmail <dot> com... neozeed (talk) 06:42, 8 September 2021 (CEST)
Autopatrolled
I was going to try and turn on Autopatrolled for you, so I don't have to do that for your edits, but apparently as a mere 'administrator' I can't do that, only 'bureaucrats' can. Maybe I'll drop Tore a line, and ask him to do it. (I think as a mere 'user' you can't see the 'unpatrolled edit' marker in Special:RecentChanges; ISTR I did an experiment from another non-admin account - my wife's - to check if they showed up.)
PS: I loved the 'meow' - took me a few moments to get it! Jnc (talk) 14:24, 28 April 2022 (CEST)
- No, I had no idea there was such as thing as "autopatrol", and I never before saw that list of group rights. By all means, if it's any trouble have any appropriates properties turned on. Larsbrinkhoff (talk) 19:19, 28 April 2022 (CEST)
Gordon Bell oral history
I dunno if you've ever read his oral history thing the CHM did, but it's worth reading; I just linked it in, at C. Gordon Bell. Jnc (talk) 15:21, 6 April 2023 (CEST)
Not individual models
Not individual models - there are hundreds of them! We'd be here all year! So only tag PDP-11 with Category:16-bit Computers, not PDP-11/20, PDP-11/45, etc. Unless there's a good reason to do individual models? (I can't think of one off the top of my head, but there might be.) Jnc (talk) 13:55, 11 July 2023 (CEST)
- Sure. I wasn't going to touch the PDP-11s. At least not today. I did go through the PDP-8's, but they aren't as plentiful. Larsbrinkhoff (talk) 13:57, 11 July 2023 (CEST)
- There are also all the VAXen. I thought we had individual pages for some IBM System/360 models, but apparently not. We do have KA10, etc, of course. Jnc (talk) 14:32, 11 July 2023 (CEST)
- The KA10 is arguably a processor, not a full computer. Maybe the categories should cover processors and architectures too, but I'm not in a hurry to do that now. But e.g. microprocessors like 4004, 8080, 6502 ought to have a place in this. Larsbrinkhoff (talk) 15:24, 11 July 2023 (CEST)
- Well, true, technically the KA10 is a processor - but we don't have pages for the KA10 models, like the 1040. So KA10 is kind of a stand-in for them (in not being categorized).
- Yes, micros should be covered too. But again, as you suggest, architectures/lines, not models. So Motorola M68000 Family goes in Category:32-bit Computers, but not Motorola MC68000. I will write a few words someplace to formalize this - once I figure out what the right place is! Jnc (talk) 18:29, 11 July 2023 (CEST)
