Upgrade Question

[Gene E. Bloch]

That looks to be an overly complicated, and overly wordy, restatement
of Gene's (and my own) understanding.

Well, I have to admit that the button/buttonhole analogy confused me enough
that i just went back to my understanding of threaded lists to try to guess
what Ken meant

I don't see the buttonhole thing being very different from my remarks about
threading through a maze or threading beads on a string. I also see the
name "threaded", as in threaded lists, being derived from the more homely
examples such as the ones I cited, and "thread" as used in news threads
being derived from those same ideas, rather than a thread (pun intended) of
etymology going from the everyday examples to the threaded lists to the
newsgroup threads.

BTW, I have seen beadwork where there are several threads running through
the beads, with one thread perhaps going through beads B1 B2 B3 and another
perhaps through A2 B2 C2, if you get my drift. There would be only one hole
in each bead though, large enough to allow a couple of threads to pass
through. Yikes! I just remembered the structure of core memory (magnetic
cores, of course). It's a lot like what I just described...

I believe I may have programmed data structures involving several sets of
links, such as records threaded simultaneously by name and by date of
birth. Note that computer threaded lists use pointers instead of cotton
lisle thread, providing generous opportunities for bugs

 

[Char Jackson]

Well, I have to admit that the button/buttonhole analogy confused me enough
that i just went back to my understanding of threaded lists to try to guess
what Ken meant

I don't see the buttonhole thing being very different from my remarks about
threading through a maze or threading beads on a string. I also see the
name "threaded", as in threaded lists, being derived from the more homely
examples such as the ones I cited, and "thread" as used in news threads
being derived from those same ideas, rather than a thread (pun intended) of
etymology going from the everyday examples to the threaded lists to the
newsgroup threads.

BTW, I have seen beadwork where there are several threads running through
the beads, with one thread perhaps going through beads B1 B2 B3 and another
perhaps through A2 B2 C2, if you get my drift. There would be only one hole
in each bead though, large enough to allow a couple of threads to pass
through. Yikes! I just remembered the structure of core memory (magnetic
cores, of course). It's a lot like what I just described...

I believe I may have programmed data structures involving several sets of
links, such as records threaded simultaneously by name and by date of
birth. Note that computer threaded lists use pointers instead of cotton
lisle thread, providing generous opportunities for bugs

Would this be a good time to remind folks where the term 'bug' came
from?

 

[Gene E. Bloch]

Would this be a good time to remind folks where the term 'bug' came
from?

Nah, it's apocryphal.

For instance, the term has been cited, with a similar meaning, in the
writings of Thomas Edison, long before Grace Hopper's experience.

She just verified that bugs can be real

My first Google hit:
http://www.jamesshuggins.com/h/tek1/first_computer_bug.htm

Since it agrees with me, I believe it

 

[Gene E. Bloch]

Nah, it's apocryphal.

For instance, the term has been cited, with a similar meaning, in the
writings of Thomas Edison, long before Grace Hopper's experience.

She just verified that bugs can be real

My first Google hit:
http://www.jamesshuggins.com/h/tek1/first_computer_bug.htm

Since it agrees with me, I believe it

My description is a bit harsh, I'd say. The bug was real, and she probably
the first person to document so publicly a real bug (insect!) causing a
computer failure.

I really only meant that the use of the word bug to mean a flaw or
unexplained failure is quit old, and that Grace Hopper didn't *coin* the
term.

The link I cited is pretty good, I think, and if you go here:

http://www.jamesshuggins.com/h/tek1/first_computer_bug_large.htm

and scroll down a ways, the author shows a big picture of said moth.

 

[Gene E. Bloch]

and she probably the first person

and she probably *was* the first person

Lousy typist, lousy proofreeder.

("proofreeder" was intentional, for a change.)

 

[Ken Blake]

Well, I have to admit that the button/buttonhole analogy confused me enough
that i just went back to my understanding of threaded lists to try to guess
what Ken meant

In that case, I recommend that you do a web search and see if you find
someplace that explains it better than I did. What you say and what I
said were not the same.

Ken

 

[Ken Blake]

On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 19:57:35 -0500, Char Jackson wrote:


Nah, it's apocryphal.

Took the words out of my mouth. I was just about to post the same
thing.

For instance, the term has been cited, with a similar meaning, in the
writings of Thomas Edison, long before Grace Hopper's experience.

By the way, I met her once, abut 30 years ago, and she verified that
the story was apocryphal.

 

[Ken Blake]

and she probably *was* the first person

Lousy typist, lousy proofreeder.

("proofreeder" was intentional, for a change.)

Interesting. I am also a lousy typist (I use just a couple of
fingers), but a very good proofreader, as long as I'm proofreading
what someone else wrote. I'm terrible at proofreading my own stuff.

 

[relic]

Interesting. I am also a lousy typist (I use just a couple of
fingers), but a very good proofreader, as long as I'm proofreading
what someone else wrote. I'm terrible at proofreading my own stuff.

Ditto. That's why I seldom comment about other's typos.

 

[Ken Blake]

Ditto. That's why I seldom comment about other's typos.

Same here. The only time I call attention to someone's typo (or error
in spelling, grammar, or usage) is in a technical message when the
error might confuse the meaning.

 

[Char Jackson]

Same here. The only time I call attention to someone's typo (or error
in spelling, grammar, or usage) is in a technical message when the
error might confuse the meaning.

<AOL>Me too!</AOL>

 

[Gene E. Bloch]

In that case, I recommend that you do a web search and see if you find
someplace that explains it better than I did. What you say and what I
said were not the same.

Ken

That's OK, I can live with the error

For one thing, I honestly have no idea what I would be looking for, which
makes it heard to pose a meaningful query.

 

[Gene E. Bloch]

Interesting. I am also a lousy typist (I use just a couple of
fingers), but a very good proofreader, as long as I'm proofreading
what someone else wrote. I'm terrible at proofreading my own stuff.

My hypothesis is that you (and I and relic and Ken and Char and a million
others) already *know* what the text says.

In different words, since we wrote it, we have a mental picture of it that
is unaffected by reality.

As I look at that last sentence, I realize that the phenomenon is not by
any means limited to proofreading

Or maybe I mean :-(

 

[Ken Blake]

My hypothesis is that you (and I and relic and Ken and Char and a million
others) already *know* what the text says.

You are very likely right.

 

[Peter Foldes]

There is no update path from 32 bit to 64 bit as there is no downgrade path from 64
to 32.

Afraid the step from 32 bit to 64 bit is only by a fresh install

--
Peter

Please Reply to Newsgroup for the benefit of others
Requests for assistance by email can not and will not be acknowledged.
http://www.microsoft.com/protect

 

[Dave]

Same here. The only time I call attention to someone's typo (or error
in spelling, grammar, or usage) is in a technical message when the
error might confuse the meaning.

Have you seen the email that went around some time back, with the letters in
words scrambled? According to some study, they found that most people will
still recognize a word if the first and (IIRC) last letters are correct and
the other letters are scrambled. The email had a message with words like
that and interestingly, it was readable.
Dave

 

[Ken Blake]

Have you seen the email that went around some time back, with the letters in
words scrambled? According to some study, they found that most people will
still recognize a word if the first and (IIRC) last letters are correct and
the other letters are scrambled. The email had a message with words like
that and interestingly, it was readable.

Yes, I've seen it, and I don't completely agree with it. It's true of
some words, but not others (especially longer ones). So, picking out
examples of words from your message, "anurod" doesn't look like
"around," "agroccrind" doesn't look like "according," "ilettrinensy"
doesn't look like "interestingly," and so on. The words in the message
were carefully chosen.

 

[Dave]

Yes, I've seen it, and I don't completely agree with it. It's true of
some words, but not others (especially longer ones). So, picking out
examples of words from your message, "anurod" doesn't look like
"around," "agroccrind" doesn't look like "according," "ilettrinensy"
doesn't look like "interestingly," and so on. The words in the message
were carefully chosen.

I see your logic. There's another urban legend I can quit sending around.
:-D

 

[felmon]

Yes, I've seen it, and I don't completely agree with it. It's true of
some words, but not others (especially longer ones). So, picking out
examples of words from your message, "anurod" doesn't look like
"around," "agroccrind" doesn't look like "according," "ilettrinensy"
doesn't look like "interestingly," and so on. The words in the message
were carefully chosen.

I am not sure but I believe the phenomenon requires a _context_. you
cannot understand scrambled letters of _isolated_ words.

e.g. "I am not sure but I belivee the pehmonoenn reqruies a _ceoxtnt_.
you caonnt uednranstd scabmerld lettres of _ilosated_ words."

note also the hypothesis requires that the first and the last letter
correspond to the word. 'agroccrind' does not have the first and last
letter of 'according'.

perhaps this was a typo?<g>

Felmon