User talk:ForOldHack

Sigs on Talk: pages

We generally try and follow the Wikipedia style of signing posts on Talk: pages (so that people reading them will know straight off, without having to look in the history, who made comments, and when). There's even special Wiki syntax to do this easily; just add ~~~~ to the end of your post, and it will be automagically transformed in this sig, with the user and time. Jnc (talk) 13:21, 11 March 2019 (CET)

Hmm, something else is going on. 'ForOldHack (talk) 01:41, 12 March 2019 (CET)' gives me date and time, and ~~~~ gives me 4 tildies.

Oh, now I understand to escape the wiki process and get tildies, use ~~~~, but to get the sig use ForOldHack (talk) 01:42, 12 March 2019 (CET)

I have not seen such a funny time stamp in 34 years, when we were using uwasa.fi as a mail relay. ( Time is Wasausa, Finland ) ForOldHack (talk) 01:45, 12 March 2019 (CET)

Please don't forget; I can add the sig manually, but it's easier for you. Thanks! Jnc (talk) 14:52, 22 March 2019 (CET)

Note

I would like to print to npib78003.local ForOldHack (talk) 05:45, 27 March 2019 (CET)

Infobox line captions

The captions in info boxes are specified in the template, as are the argument names; trying to change either in the invocation has no effect.

If you want to change the 'Year introduced' caption, I'd be OK with that, but just to 'Introduced' I think might be potentially confusing without something to indicate that it's a temporal meaning - e.g. 'Date introduced', or something. Jnc (talk) 12:04, 7 April 2019 (CEST)

Introduced sounds like marketing speak, I would prefer Release dates, since that would cover both people receiving mag tapes, and downloading comparable source. I got Redhat 5.0 on the day of release, and was able to torrent it, and was able to install it quickly. I went to a user group meeting, and for the cost of $5, got 1) a backup CD, 2) a great Tshirt, 3) a great how-to manual, and 4) some nifty stickers. Needless to say, from that day forward, I saw the lack of value in Microsoft Products. ForOldHack (talk) 11:52, 12 April 2019 (CEST)

OK, 'Date released' would work in Template:Infobox Software, Template:Infobox OS, and Template:Infobox App. I'll go ahead and make that change (although it will only be in the caption, not in the argument name - if I change that, I'd have to change every article that calls those templates).

Not sure that to do about Template:Infobox Machine, etc - would 'Date introduced' work there? Jnc (talk) 16:20, 16 April 2019 (CEST)

Back to the Temporal part, We want a label to indicate its first start of general use, so that a corresponding date tag, could map to what hardware it would run on, i.e. XENIX would have a 1985 release date, and the current hardware was XTs, Turbo XTs, ATs and a few clones,

Verses ATT SYS V, I guess I see through the eyes of my first C teacher, Barry Kercheval, who liked Sun workstations, because of their OS, and their compiler. The MS-DOS C compilers at the time were hacks, Microsoft C was bad, Aztek C was a bit better, Manx C would make code easy to port from Amiga to PC, and we would get constant diffrences between those and XENIX, and the other boxes we would remote into to look at their compilers. ForOldHack (talk) 11:52, 12 April 2019 (CEST)

The way I'd handle OS's where they were released on different dates on different hardware would be to put multiple entries in the 'Date released' box (sort of like the mutiple entries under 'Capacity' here); one line for each type of hardware. Jnc (talk) 16:20, 16 April 2019 (CEST)

For RT-11, A list of boxes that it could run on, and the corresponding CPUs and memory cards that would support it, would be useful. i.e. It would not run on this hardware, but certainly would run on the current hardware of the day. ForOldHack (talk) 11:52, 12 April 2019 (CEST)

External link syntax

We generally like to give the title of our external links, using the syntax '[URL title]', so instead of:

[1]

one sees this:

Digital Equipment Corporation Indicator Panels

Much nicer for our readers! The title is formally given inside <title> tags in the HTML of the page, and displayed by the browser (often in the window title bar, but exactly how will depend on the browser and OS).

PS: You shouldn't stick a sig in additions to content pages (where it intrudes), you only need to do it on Talk: pages. The reasoning (it dates to a very early stage on Wikipedia, before even I started there) seems to be that if one wants to know where something in a content page comes from, one looks at the History of that page; on Talk: pages (especially if one is reading one later - see for example the discussion at Help talk:Introduction to Categories), one can easily see who posted a given item directly, without needing to grub around in the history. Jnc (talk) 15:25, 7 April 2019 (CEST)

Very sorry, I had forgot, and even forgot to look it up. I am so amazed by the tiny bits I have found, I only used some of those machines a few times, they were apprently very popular because they were so fantastic.

Ill follow this convention on. ForOldHack (talk) 04:57, 8 April 2019 (CET)

Sure. BTW, here is the Wikipedia sig policy, which we follow (although we don't follow Wikipedia in most things, in this one we do). Jnc (talk) 15:12, 9 April 2019 (CEST)

When a user sees this: [System 286 release notes] it had me choking with laughter. ForOldHack (talk) 10:59, 12 April 2019 (CET)

Actually, I didn't write that - someone else at MIT did (don't recall who). The only humour thing I did was the first "Alice's" hack - Alice's PDP-10, maybe? Jnc (talk) 14:36, 13 April 2019 (CEST)

new user

I don't see a new user. You are the newest user since 8 March 2019. Dugo (talk) 11:25, 11 April 2019 (CEST)

Right, you created a new page, User talk:ForOldHack/My sandbox‎‎, in the 'User talk' namespace. On this wiki, only admins can create new user accounts. Jnc (talk) 14:12, 11 April 2019 (CEST)

Yes, I understand. Page deleted. It does help a lot that you have more Wikipedia experience then I. Thanks. ForOldHack (talk) 10:35, 12 April 2019 (CEST)

Technically, you 'blanked' the page; it (and its history) are still there. It is actually possible to remove a page totally, but only admins have that ability. Please let me know if you ever want a page (e.g. that one) nuked. Jnc (talk) 14:43, 13 April 2019 (CEST)

Yes, I have grabbed the information off that page, it can go into the great bit bucket (trash/recycler/ /dev/null)

How many euphemisms can we come up with for deleting a file/page? ForOldHack (talk) 19:43, 17 April 2019 (CEST)

OK, I have deleted that page. If I misunderstood you, or you change your mind, please let me know and I can restore it. Jnc (talk) 16:45, 24 April 2019 (CEST)

Visualization

This is an exercise to create a text based visualization tool to categorize memory boards and their resultant available operating systems:

Chips: Motherboard OS

1x16 DRAM    IBM PC V1      DOS 1.0 ( August 1981 ) 
                            DOS 1.1 ( August 1981 )
                            CPM-86
                            UCSD-p 

Hm... Chart:

Dos chart, and early windows, no server.

ForOldHack (talk) 10:35, 12 April 2019 (CEST)