From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.misc

As per subject, I have recently installed Linux Mint Cinnamon on our
trusty old 2014 MacBook Air, and it has been an excellent choice!

I have minimal experience with Linux, and with the recent purchase of a
Macbook Neo for our son the Air suddenly found itself without a use (it
had previously been my son's daily driver, running Big Sur, and coping perfectly well with almost everything he could throw at it (even Roblox, although some of the sub-games he joined were pretty glitchy...)).

It is the entry-level variant of the model, with a 1.4Ghz CPU, 250GB SSD,
and 4GB RAM. It had always surprised me in recent years how well it
continued to perform, especially in the last 12 months as my son used it a
lot - including for 3D design and printing - but since giving Linux Mint a
spin on it I have been even more impressed; the system runs like lightning
and, so far, I have not encountered any sluggish performance with any of
the apps I have run on it.

So, that's hopefully some useful info for anybody with an old Air kicking around - it could potentially be an excellent Linux-dedicated machine for
you! Installation was very simple, too, with a bootable USB-stick made in
a few steps and less than 10 minutes total to complete the full
installation once begun.

I'm still finding my feet with Linux - there's a few strange quirls to it
that my Mac-shaped brain is struggling to cope with - but everything is
working well - trackpad, sound, wi-fi, I have encountered no hardware
problems whatsoever (other than having to remember different keyboard shortcuts...).

Highly recommended!
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.misc

Am 19.06.26 um 19:42 schrieb scole:

As per subject, I have recently installed Linux Mint Cinnamon on our
trusty old 2014 MacBook Air, and it has been an excellent choice!

I have minimal experience with Linux, and with the recent purchase of a Macbook Neo for our son the Air suddenly found itself without a use (it
had previously been my son's daily driver, running Big Sur, and coping perfectly well with almost everything he could throw at it (even Roblox, although some of the sub-games he joined were pretty glitchy...)).

It is the entry-level variant of the model, with a 1.4Ghz CPU, 250GB SSD,
and 4GB RAM. It had always surprised me in recent years how well it
continued to perform, especially in the last 12 months as my son used it a lot - including for 3D design and printing - but since giving Linux Mint a spin on it I have been even more impressed; the system runs like lightning and, so far, I have not encountered any sluggish performance with any of
the apps I have run on it.

So, that's hopefully some useful info for anybody with an old Air kicking around - it could potentially be an excellent Linux-dedicated machine for you! Installation was very simple, too, with a bootable USB-stick made in
a few steps and less than 10 minutes total to complete the full
installation once begun.

I'm still finding my feet with Linux - there's a few strange quirls to it that my Mac-shaped brain is struggling to cope with - but everything is working well - trackpad, sound, wi-fi, I have encountered no hardware problems whatsoever (other than having to remember different keyboard shortcuts...).

Highly recommended!

Nice to hear this report of your experience. I'm running a late 2010
MacBook Air with Debian Trixie for 2 yrs. now, and excited.
It is uptodate, too. Very easy install of the OS Every software I
installed worked as a charm.
Same is the hardware. There are points with hibernation and noveau
driver - sometimes the screen stays black. I'm always shutting the
machine down now.

The only issue is that I was informed the accumulator won't be available anymore, at least in Germany.

---

Regards
JJenssen
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.misc

In article <1115q51$la$1@dont-email.me>, joemajen@arcor.de wrote:

Am 19.06.26 um 19:42 schrieb scole:

<snip>

Highly recommended!

Nice to hear this report of your experience.

No worries, my pleasure!

I'm running a late 2010 MacBook Air with Debian Trixie for 2 yrs. now,

and excited.

It is uptodate, too. Very easy install of the OS Every software I installed worked as a charm.
Same is the hardware. There are points with hibernation and noveau
driver - sometimes the screen stays black. I'm always shutting the
machine down now.

I have so far hit any hardware problems - everything is working fine. I'm actually really surprised, I was expecting the trackpad to be an issue -
but it is perfect!

The system feels very fast and responsive, and the GUI is relatively close
to Mac OS styling, so it doesn't feel too alien. I've used Terminal in Mac
OS plenty in the past, so there hasn't been too much of a learning curve
on that side of it either, although I am absolutely not a CLI expert!

The only issue is that I was informed the accumulator won't be available anymore, at least in Germany.

I'm unfamiliar with "the accumulator"...
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.misc

On 20/06/2026 13:10, scole wrote:

I'm unfamiliar with "the accumulator"...

Rechargeable battery?
--
"In our post-modern world, climate science is not powerful because it is
true: it is true because it is powerful."

Lucas Bergkamp

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.misc

Am 20.06.26 um 15:42 schrieb The Natural Philosopher:

On 20/06/2026 13:10, scole wrote:

I'm unfamiliar with "the accumulator"...

Rechargeable battery?

Yes, that is meant. Thank you :)

---

Regards
JJenssen
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.misc

JJenssen <joemajen@arcor.de> wrote:

Am 20.06.26 um 15:42 schrieb The Natural Philosopher:

On 20/06/2026 13:10, scole wrote:

I'm unfamiliar with "the accumulator"...

Rechargeable battery?

Yes, that is meant. Thank you :)

This thread for some reason gave me 40 year old 6502 vibes, where the
only fully usable register is called the accumulator.

Thank you for the smile.

Greetings
Marc
-- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Marc Haber | " Questions are the | Mailadresse im Header Rhein-Neckar, DE | Beginning of Wisdom " |
Nordisch by Nature | Lt. Worf, TNG "Rightful Heir" | Fon: *49 6224 1600402
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.misc

On 21/06/2026 08:35, Marc Haber wrote:

JJenssen <joemajen@arcor.de> wrote:

Am 20.06.26 um 15:42 schrieb The Natural Philosopher:

On 20/06/2026 13:10, scole wrote:

I'm unfamiliar with "the accumulator"...

Rechargeable battery?

Yes, that is meant. Thank you :)

This thread for some reason gave me 40 year old 6502 vibes, where the
only fully usable register is called the accumulator.

Still is, I think.

Usually abbreviated to A

Thank you for the smile.

Greetings
Marc

--
“Puritanism: The haunting fear that someone, somewhere, may be happy.”

H.L. Mencken, A Mencken Chrestomathy

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.misc

In article <1117u54$iqhs$1@dont-email.me>, joemajen@arcor.de wrote:

Am 20.06.26 um 15:42 schrieb The Natural Philosopher:

On 20/06/2026 13:10, scole wrote:

I'm unfamiliar with "the accumulator"...

Rechargeable battery?

Yes, that is meant. Thank you :)

OK, understood. So far, there have been no problems with the battery -
charges fine, the laptop works perfectly conencted to the charger and
while disconnected, all seems good.

One oddity I encountered last night, and have repeated a few times since (although not every time) is when I close the lid while the machine is
still on sometimes the machine turns itself off rather than go to sleep!
Like I said, it doesn't happen every time so I am trying to pin down which variable I am doing that causes it...

Other than that, all good!
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.misc

On 21/06/2026 14:21, scole wrote:

In article <1117u54$iqhs$1@dont-email.me>, joemajen@arcor.de wrote:

Am 20.06.26 um 15:42 schrieb The Natural Philosopher:

On 20/06/2026 13:10, scole wrote:

I'm unfamiliar with "the accumulator"...

Rechargeable battery?

Yes, that is meant. Thank you :)

OK, understood. So far, there have been no problems with the battery - charges fine, the laptop works perfectly conencted to the charger and
while disconnected, all seems good.

One oddity I encountered last night, and have repeated a few times since (although not every time) is when I close the lid while the machine is
still on sometimes the machine turns itself off rather than go to sleep!
Like I said, it doesn't happen every time so I am trying to pin down which variable I am doing that causes it...

Linux is rather skittish about resuming after suspending/hibernating. I
think it has been one of the toughest nuts to crack.

My laptop *generally* comes back and reconnects to the wifi. But it
hasn't always been the case with earlier versions.

There may be configuration on whether you are suspending hibernating or shutting down on lid close

Other than that, all good!

--
I was brought up to believe that you should never give offence if you
can avoid it; the new culture tells us you should always take offence if
you can. There are now experts in the art of taking offence, indeed
whole academic subjects, such as 'gender studies', devoted to it.

Sir Roger Scruton

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.misc

On 2026-06-21 18:28, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

On 21/06/2026 14:21, scole wrote:

In article <1117u54$iqhs$1@dont-email.me>, joemajen@arcor.de wrote:

Am 20.06.26 um 15:42 schrieb The Natural Philosopher:

On 20/06/2026 13:10, scole wrote:

I'm unfamiliar with "the accumulator"...

Rechargeable battery?

Yes, that is meant.  Thank you :)

OK, understood. So far, there have been no problems with the battery -
charges fine, the laptop works perfectly conencted to the charger and
while disconnected, all seems good.

One oddity I encountered last night, and have repeated a few times since
(although not every time) is when I close the lid while the machine is
still on sometimes the machine turns itself off rather than go to sleep!
Like I said, it doesn't happen every time so I am trying to pin down
which
variable I am doing that causes it...

Linux is rather skittish about resuming after suspending/hibernating. I think it has been one of the toughest nuts to crack.

My laptop *generally* comes back and reconnects to  the wifi. But it
hasn't always been the case with earlier versions.

There may be configuration on whether you are suspending hibernating or shutting down on lid close

It varies over the years, same machine.

Mine sometimes freezes on lid opening. Random.

My desktop hibernates fine for about two or three weeks, then crashes:
new boot on wake up.

Another old and small laptop which I connect to the TV on sitting room
to watch movies, some times doesn't light up on wake up (either its own display or the TV display).
--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.
ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.misc

On 2026-06-21, Carlos E. R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:

On 2026-06-21 18:28, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

Linux is rather skittish about resuming after suspending/hibernating.
I think it has been one of the toughest nuts to crack.

My laptop *generally* comes back and reconnects to  the wifi. But it
hasn't always been the case with earlier versions.

There may be configuration on whether you are suspending hibernating or
shutting down on lid close

It varies over the years, same machine.

Mine sometimes freezes on lid opening. Random.

My desktop hibernates fine for about two or three weeks, then crashes:
new boot on wake up.

Another old and small laptop which I connect to the TV on sitting room
to watch movies, some times doesn't light up on wake up (either its own display or the TV display).

My Lenovo T410, running Debian Bookworm, sometimes sits with a black screen
for as much as two minutes before waking up when I open the lid. If it's really stubborn, I've found that pressing and holding the power button for
a second or two (not enough to force a full power-down), will often give
it the kick in the pants it seems to need.

Mind you, even in normal operation while using the command line, or command-line utilities, the display will often freeze for a couple
of seconds. Anything I type during this time is not lost; it will
appear where it belongs when the machine comes back to life.
--
/~\ Charlie Gibbs | No artificial
\ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | intelligence was
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | used in the creation
/ \ if you read it the right way. | of this post.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.misc

On Sun, 21 Jun 2026 09:35:34 +0200, Marc Haber wrote:

JJenssen <joemajen@arcor.de> wrote:

Am 20.06.26 um 15:42 schrieb The Natural Philosopher:

On 20/06/2026 13:10, scole wrote:

I'm unfamiliar with "the accumulator"...

Rechargeable battery?

Yes, that is meant. Thank you

This thread for some reason gave me 40 year old 6502 vibes, where the
only fully usable register is called the accumulator.

The Z80 also had the AF register pair. A was the accumulator and F was the flag register.

Somewhere along the way I acquired 'Programming and Interfacing the 6502
With Experiments' although I never worked with the 6502.

https://shop.eater.net/products/6502-computer-kit

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LnzuMJLZRdU

The videos are interesting since he uses a modern static version that can
be stepped very slowly. At around 9:30 in the video he sets up an Arduino
Mega to read the 6502 outputs.

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.misc

On Sun, 21 Jun 2026 17:28:37 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

My laptop *generally* comes back and reconnects to the wifi. But it
hasn't always been the case with earlier versions.

There may be configuration on whether you are suspending hibernating or shutting down on lid close

Leap 16 on the Lenovo is good at coming back from the dead. I had to do a little tweaking since at the moment I have two WiFi APs, Verizon and
StarLink. It would come up and connect to Verizon. Not handy if you want
to connect to the Fedora box on the StarLink LAN.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.misc

On 2026-06-21 07:35:34 +0000, Marc Haber said:

JJenssen <joemajen@arcor.de> wrote:

Am 20.06.26 um 15:42 schrieb The Natural Philosopher:

On 20/06/2026 13:10, scole wrote:

I'm unfamiliar with "the accumulator"...

Rechargeable battery?

Yes, that is meant. Thank you :)

This thread for some reason gave me 40 year old 6502 vibes, where the
only fully usable register is called the accumulator.

Thank you for the smile.

Greetings
Marc

If you're a idiot with more money than sense who gambles, then an "accumulator" is also a term used in betting. Basically it is making a
single bet that four or more outcomes all happen, usually in order, so
the chances of winning are even smaller.

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.misc

On Sun, 21 Jun 2026 17:38:22 GMT, Charlie Gibbs wrote:

My Lenovo T410, running Debian Bookworm, sometimes sits with a black
screen for as much as two minutes before waking up when I open the lid.
If it's really stubborn, I've found that pressing and holding the power button for a second or two (not enough to force a full power-down), will often give it the kick in the pants it seems to need.

My Lenovo T480 is the Leap 16 machine. For me a quick press of the power button is SOP when I move to it. When I had Endeavour on it sometimes a complete restart was needed. Endeavour/Arch worked well until it didn't.
Like Tumbbleweed, Rawhide, and Sid it required more care and feeding than
the benefits of having the latest greatest brought.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.misc

Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> wrote:

If you're a idiot with more money than sense who gambles, then an >"accumulator" is also a term used in betting. Basically it is making a >single bet that four or more outcomes all happen, usually in order, so
the chances of winning are even smaller.

I didn't know that. Thanks for educating me. It's unlikely I'll ever
need that word in that context ;-)

Grüße
Marc
-- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Marc Haber | " Questions are the | Mailadresse im Header Rhein-Neckar, DE | Beginning of Wisdom " |
Nordisch by Nature | Lt. Worf, TNG "Rightful Heir" | Fon: *49 6224 1600402
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.misc

On 22/06/2026 07:13, Marc Haber wrote:

Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> wrote:

If you're a idiot with more money than sense who gambles, then an
"accumulator" is also a term used in betting. Basically it is making a
single bet that four or more outcomes all happen, usually in order, so
the chances of winning are even smaller.

I didn't know that. Thanks for educating me. It's unlikely I'll ever
need that word in that context ;-)

I have never ised it in that sense although living at the centre of UK horseracing I know plenty who have, Every so often someone wins big and
takes his mates to a big champagne dinner and the local papers talk
about it.
Etymologically it just means a place where stuff sticks around and gets bigger.
If its money its an accumulator bet. Or in fact a stock market fund
whose purpose is not to deliver income, but to grow capital worth.
Electrically its a secondary cell - one in which charge can be actively stored.
On a CPU its the register where (most) results are placed - they may
not be additions in this context of course

Grüße
Marc

--
"Fanaticism consists in redoubling your effort when you have
forgotten your aim."

George Santayana

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.misc

On Mon, 22 Jun 2026 10:26:25 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

I have never ised it in that sense although living at the centre of UK horseracing I know plenty who have, Every so often someone wins big and
takes his mates to a big champagne dinner and the local papers talk
about it.

I don't think it's rare enough to make the papers but at least in the US a 'trifecta' is when you pick the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd place horses in a single race. The concept has been expanded to the lotteries.

New York state was one of the first to start a state run lottery. There
was a bit of a scandal when someone found the winning ticket was pulled
from the set of all tickets printed, not the set of the tickets actually
sold. An innocent mistake, I'm sure.

What odds are the books giving on your next PM? At least you can get rid
of the bastards in less than 4 years.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.misc

On 22/06/2026 15:03, rbowman wrote:

On Mon, 22 Jun 2026 10:26:25 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

I have never ised it in that sense although living at the centre of UK
horseracing I know plenty who have, Every so often someone wins big and
takes his mates to a big champagne dinner and the local papers talk
about it.

I don't think it's rare enough to make the papers but at least in the US a 'trifecta' is when you pick the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd place horses in a single race. The concept has been expanded to the lotteries.

New York state was one of the first to start a state run lottery. There
was a bit of a scandal when someone found the winning ticket was pulled
from the set of all tickets printed, not the set of the tickets actually sold. An innocent mistake, I'm sure.

What odds are the books giving on your next PM? At least you can get rid
of the bastards in less than 4 years.

Odds on what? that he dies from a surfeit of peaches and cider?

My guess is he wont be able to do anything constructive, At best he may
do nothing at all.
--
“Some people like to travel by train because it combines the slowness of
a car with the cramped public exposure of 
an airplane.”

Dennis Miller


--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.misc

On 2026-06-22, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:

On 22/06/2026 07:13, Marc Haber wrote:

Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> wrote:

If you're a idiot with more money than sense who gambles, then an
"accumulator" is also a term used in betting. Basically it is making a
single bet that four or more outcomes all happen, usually in order, so
the chances of winning are even smaller.

I didn't know that. Thanks for educating me. It's unlikely I'll ever
need that word in that context ;-)

I have never ised it in that sense although living at the centre of UK horseracing I know plenty who have, Every so often someone wins big and takes his mates to a big champagne dinner and the local papers talk
about it.
Etymologically it just means a place where stuff sticks around and gets bigger.
If its money its an accumulator bet. Or in fact a stock market fund
whose purpose is not to deliver income, but to grow capital worth. Electrically its a secondary cell - one in which charge can be actively stored.
On a CPU its the register where (most) results are placed - they may
not be additions in this context of course

My closet is an accumulator; it gathers junk and dust bunnies.
--
/~\ Charlie Gibbs | No artificial
\ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | intelligence was
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | used in the creation
/ \ if you read it the right way. | of this post.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.misc

On Mon, 22 Jun 2026 17:07:23 GMT, Charlie Gibbs wrote:

My closet is an accumulator; it gathers junk and dust bunnies.

You're lucky. I have a whole garden shed that does that. Maybe not bunnies
but the random cat that gets nosy.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.misc

On Mon, 22 Jun 2026 17:25:47 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

On 22/06/2026 15:03, rbowman wrote:

On Mon, 22 Jun 2026 10:26:25 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

I have never ised it in that sense although living at the centre of UK
horseracing I know plenty who have, Every so often someone wins big
and takes his mates to a big champagne dinner and the local papers
talk about it.

I don't think it's rare enough to make the papers but at least in the
US a 'trifecta' is when you pick the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd place horses in
a single race. The concept has been expanded to the lotteries.

New York state was one of the first to start a state run lottery. There
was a bit of a scandal when someone found the winning ticket was pulled
from the set of all tickets printed, not the set of the tickets
actually sold. An innocent mistake, I'm sure.

What odds are the books giving on your next PM? At least you can get
rid of the bastards in less than 4 years.

Odds on what? that he dies from a surfeit of peaches and cider?

My guess is he wont be able to do anything constructive, At best he may
do nothing at all.

I meant who are the odds makers saying will be the next up. Burnham? At
least he lasted longer than Liz though he may have eclipsed Trump's record
for going from shiny to shit.

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.misc

On 2026-06-22 20:47:11 +0000, rbowman said:

On Mon, 22 Jun 2026 17:07:23 GMT, Charlie Gibbs wrote:

My closet is an accumulator; it gathers junk and dust bunnies.

You're lucky. I have a whole garden shed that does that. Maybe not bunnies but the random cat that gets nosy.

Our garden shed hasn't been used in at least 10 years, so has a few
bits of junk and a ton of insects and spiderwebs. Plus the concrete pad
it sits on is tilted due to rain washing away some of the ground
beneath one corner ... which of course is the corner behind the shed
where the two fences meet, so it's impossible to get there to do
anything about it, unless we dismantle the whole shed. :-\

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.misc

On 22/06/2026 21:51, rbowman wrote:

On Mon, 22 Jun 2026 17:25:47 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

On 22/06/2026 15:03, rbowman wrote:

On Mon, 22 Jun 2026 10:26:25 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

I have never ised it in that sense although living at the centre of UK >>>> horseracing I know plenty who have, Every so often someone wins big
and takes his mates to a big champagne dinner and the local papers
talk about it.

I don't think it's rare enough to make the papers but at least in the
US a 'trifecta' is when you pick the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd place horses in
a single race. The concept has been expanded to the lotteries.

New York state was one of the first to start a state run lottery. There
was a bit of a scandal when someone found the winning ticket was pulled
from the set of all tickets printed, not the set of the tickets
actually sold. An innocent mistake, I'm sure.

What odds are the books giving on your next PM? At least you can get
rid of the bastards in less than 4 years.

Odds on what? that he dies from a surfeit of peaches and cider?

My guess is he wont be able to do anything constructive, At best he may
do nothing at all.

I meant who are the odds makers saying will be the next up. Burnham?

99.999% sure.

> At

least he lasted longer than Liz though he may have eclipsed Trump's record for going from shiny to shit.

--
"What do you think about Gay Marriage?"
"I don't."
"Don't what?"
"Think about Gay Marriage."


--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.misc

On Fri, 19 Jun 2026 18:42:03 +0100, scole wrote:

I'm still finding my feet with Linux - there's a few strange quirls
to it that my Mac-shaped brain is struggling to cope with ...

Yeah, Linux is a proper Unix-type system, unlike that whatever it is
that Apple runs on its machines.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.misc

On Sun, 21 Jun 2026 09:35:34 +0200, Marc Haber wrote:

This thread for some reason gave me 40 year old 6502 vibes, where the
only fully usable register is called the accumulator.

“Accumulator” was a common synonym for “register” in the early days.

E.g. I think the PDP-10 had 4 accumulators. Their assembly-language
names were AC0, AC1, AC2, AC3.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.misc

On 2026-06-24 01:24:17 +0000, Lawrence D�Oliveiro said:

On Fri, 19 Jun 2026 18:42:03 +0100, scole wrote:

I'm still finding my feet with Linux - there's a few strange quirls
to it that my Mac-shaped brain is struggling to cope with ...

Yeah, Linux is a proper Unix-type system, unlike that whatever it is
that Apple runs on its machines.

Technically, you've got that almost-backwards.

Linux is a "Unix-like" operating system. MacOS X is built on Darwin
derived from BSD, which is also another Unix-like operating system.
Although neither is true Unix, MacOS X is certified by Unix, while
Linux is not ... so legally MacOS X can call itself Unix and Linux
cannot. :-p

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.misc

Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> wrote:

On 2026-06-24 01:24:17 +0000, Lawrence D´Oliveiro said:

On Fri, 19 Jun 2026 18:42:03 +0100, scole wrote:

I'm still finding my feet with Linux - there's a few strange quirls
to it that my Mac-shaped brain is struggling to cope with ...

Yeah, Linux is a proper Unix-type system, unlike that whatever it is
that Apple runs on its machines.

Technically, you've got that almost-backwards.

Linux is a "Unix-like" operating system. MacOS X is built on Darwin
derived from BSD, which is also another Unix-like operating system.
Although neither is true Unix, MacOS X is certified by Unix, while
Linux is not ... so legally MacOS X can call itself Unix and Linux
cannot. :-p

Noone cares about the brand any more.
-- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Marc Haber | " Questions are the | Mailadresse im Header Rhein-Neckar, DE | Beginning of Wisdom " |
Nordisch by Nature | Lt. Worf, TNG "Rightful Heir" | Fon: *49 6224 1600402
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.misc

On 2026-06-24 03:30, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:

On Sun, 21 Jun 2026 09:35:34 +0200, Marc Haber wrote:

This thread for some reason gave me 40 year old 6502 vibes, where the
only fully usable register is called the accumulator.

“Accumulator” was a common synonym for “register” in the early days.

E.g. I think the PDP-10 had 4 accumulators. Their assembly-language
names were AC0, AC1, AC2, AC3.

An accumulator is not a register. It is different, you can do operations
on it. Maybe on current processors the difference is not that big.
--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.
ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.misc

On 24/06/2026 06:45, Marc Haber wrote:

Technically, you've got that almost-backwards.

Linux is a "Unix-like" operating system. MacOS X is built on Darwin
derived from BSD, which is also another Unix-like operating system.
Although neither is true Unix, MacOS X is certified by Unix, while
Linux is not ... so legally MacOS X can call itself Unix and Linux
cannot. 😛

Noone cares about the brand any more.

Exactly,. we have and operating system that works pretty well available
for free across many hardware platforms. With a cute little mascot.

Let's call it the Penguin Operating System (POS) and have done with it :-)
--
“when things get difficult you just have to lie”

― Jean Claud Jüncker

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.misc

On 24/06/2026 11:07, Carlos E. R. wrote:

On 2026-06-24 03:30, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:

On Sun, 21 Jun 2026 09:35:34 +0200, Marc Haber wrote:

This thread for some reason gave me 40 year old 6502 vibes, where the
only fully usable register is called the accumulator.

“Accumulator” was a common synonym for “register” in the early days. >>
E.g. I think the PDP-10 had 4 accumulators. Their assembly-language
names were AC0, AC1, AC2, AC3.

An accumulator is not a register. It is different, you can do operations
on it. Maybe on current processors the difference is not that big.

You can do operations on all registers too.
The accumulator is the register where the *results* of those operations typically get stored.

Bit not always.
From my days of 8088 assembler

PUSH BX has no effect on the AX accumulator. Only on general memory and
the stack pointer

Some processors did not have 'accumulators' as such, any register could
be used...

"The Motorola 68000 features sixteen 32-bit general-purpose registers
(eight data and eight address), a 32-bit Program Counter (PC), and a
16-bit Status Register (SR). It is designed with a highly orthogonal architecture where registers operate interchangeably for most data and
address calculations"
--
“I know that most men, including those at ease with problems of the greatest complexity, can seldom accept even the simplest and most
obvious truth if it be such as would oblige them to admit the falsity of conclusions which they have delighted in explaining to colleagues, which
they have proudly taught to others, and which they have woven, thread by thread, into the fabric of their lives.”

― Leo Tolstoy

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.misc

On Wed, 24 Jun 2026 07:45:57 +0200
Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam2616@zugschl.us> wrote:

Yeah, Linux is a proper Unix-type system, unlike that whatever it
is that Apple runs on its machines.

Technically, you've got that almost-backwards.

Linux is a "Unix-like" operating system. MacOS X is built on Darwin derived from BSD, which is also another Unix-like operating system. Although neither is true Unix, MacOS X is certified by Unix, while
Linux is not ... so legally MacOS X can call itself Unix and Linux
cannot. :-p

Noone cares about the brand any more.

Lawrence clearly does.

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.misc

On 24/06/2026 03:24, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:

On Fri, 19 Jun 2026 18:42:03 +0100, scole wrote:

I'm still finding my feet with Linux - there's a few strange quirls
to it that my Mac-shaped brain is struggling to cope with ...

Yeah, Linux is a proper Unix-type system, unlike that whatever it is
that Apple runs on its machines.

In what way?
--
Static tumblelog generator: https://github.com/john-bokma/tumblelog/
Available as Python or Perl. Example tumblelog: https://plurrrr.com/
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.misc

On Wed, 24 Jun 2026 12:07:47 +0200
"Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:

An accumulator is not a register. It is different, you can do
operations on it. Maybe on current processors the difference is not
that big.

The specifics depend on the architecture in question, but generally
speaking "accumulator" is used for a general-purpose register in an architecture where there are other, non-general-purpose ones - e.g. the
6502, which has A (which most of the ALU instructions work on) plus the
X and Y registers, which are index registers but can also be used as
counters or spare registers for intermediate values in a pinch.

Other architectures take a different approach, and treat most or all
registers as general-purpose - e.g. the PDP-11, and any RISC design
I've ever heard of. Some split the difference, with a set of general-
purpose registers plus a set of specialized ones (the 68k, which has
eight GPRs and eight address registers.)

And then there's the 8086, in which all registers are *sorta* general-
purpose, except they also all have special functions the others don't,
except when you can override them, but sometimes you can't... :/

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.misc

On 24/06/2026 16:01, John Ames wrote:

On Wed, 24 Jun 2026 07:45:57 +0200
Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam2616@zugschl.us> wrote:

Yeah, Linux is a proper Unix-type system, unlike that whatever it
is that Apple runs on its machines.

Technically, you've got that almost-backwards.

Linux is a "Unix-like" operating system. MacOS X is built on Darwin
derived from BSD, which is also another Unix-like operating system.
Although neither is true Unix, MacOS X is certified by Unix, while
Linux is not ... so legally MacOS X can call itself Unix and Linux
cannot. :-p

Noone cares about the brand any more.

Lawrence clearly does.

He should have said 'nobody' cares about the brand, thereby including
Lawrence
--
Climate Change: Socialism wearing a lab coat.

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.misc

On 24/06/2026 16:29, John Ames wrote:

And then there's the 8086, in which all registers are*sorta* general- purpose, except they also all have special functions the others don't,
except when you can override them, but sometimes you can't... :/

Ah the joys of doing CISC with microcode 'we've got a few more opcode
slots we can use, what weird instructions can we put in them?
--
Climate Change: Socialism wearing a lab coat.

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.misc

On 2026-06-24, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:

On 24/06/2026 16:29, John Ames wrote:

And then there's the 8086, in which all registers are*sorta* general-
purpose, except they also all have special functions the others don't,
except when you can override them, but sometimes you can't... :/

Ah the joys of doing CISC with microcode 'we've got a few more opcode
slots we can use, what weird instructions can we put in them?

Or what happens when I feed it this undocumented opcode?
People built a large table for the Z-80, which would do
all sorts of strange things with those opcodes.
--
/~\ Charlie Gibbs | No artificial
\ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | intelligence was
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | used in the creation
/ \ if you read it the right way. | of this post.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.misc

On Wed, 24 Jun 2026 07:45:57 +0200, Marc Haber wrote:

Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> wrote:

On 2026-06-24 01:24:17 +0000, Lawrence D´Oliveiro said:

On Fri, 19 Jun 2026 18:42:03 +0100, scole wrote:

I'm still finding my feet with Linux - there's a few strange quirls
to it that my Mac-shaped brain is struggling to cope with ...

Yeah, Linux is a proper Unix-type system, unlike that whatever it is
that Apple runs on its machines.

Technically, you've got that almost-backwards.

Linux is a "Unix-like" operating system. MacOS X is built on Darwin
derived from BSD, which is also another Unix-like operating system. >>Although neither is true Unix, MacOS X is certified by Unix, while Linux
is not ... so legally MacOS X can call itself Unix and Linux cannot.
:-p

Noone cares about the brand any more.

Having used AIX, which meets the Single Unix Specification for UNIX 03 I'm
not sure being a 'true UNIX' is a recommendation.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.misc

On Wed, 24 Jun 2026 11:41:48 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

You can do operations on all registers too.
The accumulator is the register where the *results* of those operations typically get stored.

On the Z80 the AF register pair were often called the accumulator but F
was the flag register.

JR NC, FOO does the relative jump if the last operation on A cleared the carry bit.


* so says the internet. I remember it as 'JNC FOO' but there was always
the confusion since Zilog couldn't use Intel's super duper patented
mnemonics.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.misc

On 2026-06-24, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:

On Wed, 24 Jun 2026 11:41:48 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

You can do operations on all registers too.
The accumulator is the register where the *results* of those operations
typically get stored.

On the Z80 the AF register pair were often called the accumulator but F
was the flag register.

JR NC, FOO does the relative jump if the last operation on A cleared the carry bit.

* so says the internet. I remember it as 'JNC FOO' but there was always
the confusion since Zilog couldn't use Intel's super duper patented mnemonics.

Too bad. I liked the Intel mnemonics better; they gave a clue as
to the operation of the instruction, which appealed to low-level
dweebs like me. I'm sure the CS weenies liked Zilog's mnemonics
better, where every data movement instruction seemed to be some
form of LD. I figured that if they were going to do that, they
might as well go whole hog and have constructs like LD PC,<addr>
for a jump, and LD A,@<portnum> for input (LD @<portnum>,A for
output, of course). Then they could eliminate the now-redundant
instruction mnemonic entirely; programs would be just a long list
of operands, with the operation implied.
--
/~\ Charlie Gibbs | No artificial
\ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | intelligence was
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | used in the creation
/ \ if you read it the right way. | of this post.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.misc

On Wed, 24 Jun 2026 19:42:20 GMT
Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:

I figured that if they were going to do that, they might as well go
whole hog and have constructs like LD PC,<addr> for a jump, and LD A,@<portnum> for input (LD @<portnum>,A for output, of course).

MOV [operand], PC is actually a valid if non-conventional form of jump
on the PDP-11; the primary difference is that it sets the flags based
on the value of the target address. And, of course, it has memory-
mapped I/O, so MOV Rn, [port]/MOV [port], Rn is indeed how it's done ;)

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.misc

On 24/06/2026 20:42, Charlie Gibbs wrote:

I liked the Intel mnemonics better; they gave a clue as
to the operation of the instruction, which appealed to low-level
dweebs like me. I'm sure the CS weenies liked Zilog's mnemonics
better, where every data movement instruction seemed to be some
form of LD.

We learnt was what necessary to get the assembler to assemble ,machine code.
No one gave a shit about 'mnemonics'

We left that argument to computer scientists who couldn't write code.
Kept them off the micros
--
You can get much farther with a kind word and a gun than you can with a
kind word alone.

Al Capone



--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.misc

On 2026-06-24 10:36:04 +0000, The Natural Philosopher said:

On 24/06/2026 06:45, Marc Haber wrote:

Technically, you've got that almost-backwards.

Linux is a "Unix-like" operating system. MacOS X is built on Darwin
derived from BSD, which is also another Unix-like operating system.
Although neither is true Unix, MacOS X is certified by Unix, while
Linux is not ... so legally MacOS X can call itself Unix and Linux
cannot. 😛

Noone cares about the brand any more.

Exactly,. we have and operating system that works pretty well available
for free across many hardware platforms. With a cute little mascot.

Let's call it the Penguin Operating System (POS) and have done with it :-)

"PoS" is definitely he correct term for the numerous different Linux
varities. None of the standard software runs on it for a start - no
Adobe, no Microsoft, etc., so if you need to use any of those to be
fully compatible ("alternatives" are never fully compatible, despite
what they like to claim), then you need to use a proper operating
system: MacOS X.

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.misc

In article <111fbuv$2lq9d$8@dont-email.me>,
Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:

On Sun, 21 Jun 2026 09:35:34 +0200, Marc Haber wrote:

This thread for some reason gave me 40 year old 6502 vibes, where the
only fully usable register is called the accumulator.

"Accumulator" was a common synonym for "register" in the early days.

An accumulator is a register, but registers aren't necessarily accumulators. The 6502 has one accumulator (A) and two index registers (X and Y).
Arithmetic and logic operations work on the accumulator, but not on the
index registers.
--
_/_
/ v \ Scott Alfter (remove the obvious to send mail)
(IIGS( https://alfter.us/ Top-posting!
\_^_/ >What's the most annoying thing on Usenet? --- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.misc

On Wed, 24 Jun 2026 21:38:09 GMT, Scott Alfter wrote:

In article <111fbuv$2lq9d$8@dont-email.me>,
Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:

On Sun, 21 Jun 2026 09:35:34 +0200, Marc Haber wrote:

This thread for some reason gave me 40 year old 6502 vibes, where
the only fully usable register is called the accumulator.

"Accumulator" was a common synonym for "register" in the early days.

An accumulator is a register, but registers aren't necessarily
accumulators. The 6502 has one accumulator (A) and two index
registers (X and Y). Arithmetic and logic operations work on the
accumulator, but not on the index registers.

Hence the qualification “index” on those particular “registers”.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.misc

On Wed, 24 Jun 2026 12:07:47 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:

On 2026-06-24 03:30, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:

On Sun, 21 Jun 2026 09:35:34 +0200, Marc Haber wrote:

This thread for some reason gave me 40 year old 6502 vibes, where
the only fully usable register is called the accumulator.

“Accumulator” was a common synonym for “register” in the early
days.

E.g. I think the PDP-10 had 4 accumulators. Their assembly-language
names were AC0, AC1, AC2, AC3.

An accumulator is not a register. It is different, you can do
operations on it.

Which one? What’s the point of having one where “you cannot do
operations on it”?
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.misc

On Wed, 24 Jun 2026 17:15:58 +0200, John Bokma wrote:

On 24/06/2026 03:24, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:

On Fri, 19 Jun 2026 18:42:03 +0100, scole wrote:

I'm still finding my feet with Linux - there's a few strange
quirls to it that my Mac-shaped brain is struggling to cope with
...

Yeah, Linux is a proper Unix-type system, unlike that whatever it
is that Apple runs on its machines.

In what way?

One obvious one: a core part of the Unix tradition was separation of
the GUI from the OS kernel. Apple threw that one right out the window.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.misc

On Thu, 25 Jun 2026 09:35:05 +1200, Your Name wrote:

None of the standard software runs on [Linux] for a start - no
Adobe, no Microsoft, etc. ...

Microsoft 365 lists Linux as a supported platform, if you really want
that. (Most of us don’t.)

As for Adobe ... that doesn’t seem to get much use in high-end content creation, so who cares?
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.misc

On Wed, 24 Jun 2026 19:42:20 GMT, Charlie Gibbs wrote:

Too bad. I liked the Intel mnemonics better; they gave a clue as to the operation of the instruction, which appealed to low-level dweebs like
me. I'm sure the CS weenies liked Zilog's mnemonics better, where every
data movement instruction seemed to be some form of LD. I figured that
if they were going to do that, they might as well go whole hog and have constructs like LD PC,<addr> for a jump, and LD A,@<portnum> for input
(LD @<portnum>,A for output, of course). Then they could eliminate the now-redundant instruction mnemonic entirely; programs would be just a
long list of operands, with the operation implied.

Digging a little deeper...

http://www.gaby.de/cpm/manuals/archive/cpm22htm/ch3.htm#Section_3.5.1

I'm not sure if I ever had a real live 8080 but the CP/M assembler stuck
used the Intel set. I was pretty set in my ways when I ran into AT&T
syntax.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.misc

On 2026-06-24, John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> wrote:

On Wed, 24 Jun 2026 19:42:20 GMT
Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:

I figured that if they were going to do that, they might as well go
whole hog and have constructs like LD PC,<addr> for a jump, and LD
A,@<portnum> for input (LD @<portnum>,A for output, of course).

MOV [operand], PC is actually a valid if non-conventional form of jump
on the PDP-11; the primary difference is that it sets the flags based
on the value of the target address. And, of course, it has memory-
mapped I/O, so MOV Rn, [port]/MOV [port], Rn is indeed how it's done ;)

I remember being dazzled by the PDP-11's machine code. Making PC and
SP just another two registers allowed all sorts of neat tricks, such
as enabling programmers to write threaded code that the hardware could interpret as a byproduct of the architecture, not by convoluted tricks.
--
/~\ Charlie Gibbs | No artificial
\ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | intelligence was
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | used in the creation
/ \ if you read it the right way. | of this post.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.misc

On Wed, 24 Jun 2026 17:35:22 +1200, Your Name wrote:

On 2026-06-24 01:24:17 +0000, Lawrence D´Oliveiro said:

Yeah, Linux is a proper Unix-type system, unlike that whatever it
is that Apple runs on its machines.

Technically, you've got that almost-backwards.

While on Thu, 25 Jun 2026 09:35:05 +1200, Your Name also wrote:

None of the standard software runs on it for a start - no Adobe, no Microsoft, etc. ...

Interesting how you can claim, on the one hand, that Linux is not a
proper Unix-type system, yet the only examples you can offer of
software that won’t run on it is from companies that are not known for producing Unix-type software ...
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.misc

On 2026-06-24, Your Name wrote:

On 2026-06-24 10:36:04 +0000, The Natural Philosopher said:

On 24/06/2026 06:45, Marc Haber wrote:

Technically, you've got that almost-backwards.

Linux is a "Unix-like" operating system. MacOS X is built on Darwin
derived from BSD, which is also another Unix-like operating system.
Although neither is true Unix, MacOS X is certified by Unix, while
Linux is not ... so legally MacOS X can call itself Unix and Linux
cannot.

Noone cares about the brand any more.

Exactly,. we have and operating system that works pretty well
available for free across many hardware platforms. With a cute
little mascot.

Let's call it the Penguin Operating System (POS) and have done with it :-)

"PoS" is definitely he correct term for the numerous different Linux varities. None of the standard software runs on it for a start - no
Adobe, no Microsoft, etc., so if you need to use any of those to be
fully compatible ("alternatives" are never fully compatible, despite
what they like to claim), then you need to use a proper operating
system: MacOS X.

And who declared Microsoft products "standard software"? The utilities available in UNIX MacOS under GNU/Linux and on BSDs are more "standard software"[1] than whatever commercial closed-source product Microsoft
comes up with. As for Adobe, if anything they have Postscript and PDF,
but I don't think they've managed to make usable PDF software for UNIX
systems (a heavy acroread certainly won't count as such), and Postscript
has had at least Ghostscript for ages. And, if they did manage to make something usable, it'd probably be closed-source and with a bunch of
features locked without a paid license.

Were it still in wider use, Shockwave Flash, which they acquired at some
point, could perhaps be better supported by improving Gnash and
Lightspark, as Adobe's own software for it wasn't - IIRC - known for its quality and performance. Or was the quality part more rumour than
reality?


[1] cf. ISO 9945:2009 / IEEE 1003.1:2008 Vol 1 §3.361, and the whole of
Vol 3.
--
Nuno Silva
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.misc

On 2026-06-25, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:

On Wed, 24 Jun 2026 17:35:22 +1200, Your Name wrote:

On 2026-06-24 01:24:17 +0000, Lawrence D´Oliveiro said:

Yeah, Linux is a proper Unix-type system, unlike that whatever it
is that Apple runs on its machines.

Technically, you've got that almost-backwards.

While on Thu, 25 Jun 2026 09:35:05 +1200, Your Name also wrote:

None of the standard software runs on it for a start - no Adobe, no
Microsoft, etc. ...

Interesting how you can claim, on the one hand, that Linux is not a
proper Unix-type system, yet the only examples you can offer of
software that won’t run on it is from companies that are not known for producing Unix-type software ...

This really sounded like coming from one of these people who believe
that Microsoft and friends are somehow the gate-keepers of computing and
that The Microsoft Way™ is the original way - which is quite funny,
given how that proprietary, closed source approach was something that
had to impose itself on an universe where the source wasn't that hidden,
from what I understand...

It's as if Microsoft succeeded in rewriting history to pretend that
their way is the way things have always been done, and pretending that open-sourced software is something novel that people are trying to push
as some sort of extremist move to displace "standard software houses",
and implying that it will never be mature enough or the like, despite
many such projects being more mature than Microsoft software, besides
older.

And there indeed are people who believe this, people who will accuse
FLOSS projects of merely trying to be "cheap copies" of proprietary
software.
--
Nuno Silva
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.misc

On 2026-06-25 01:17:08 +0000, Lawrence D´Oliveiro said:

On Thu, 25 Jun 2026 09:35:05 +1200, Your Name wrote:

None of the standard software runs on [Linux] for a start - no Adobe,
no Microsoft, etc. ...

Microsoft 365 lists Linux as a supported platform, if you really want
that. (Most of us don’t.)

"Microsfot 365" will work in anything because it's browser based ...
until Microsoft "upgrades" so it no longer works in an old web browser.
It's best to steer well clear of such silliness, as well as turning OFF auto-updtes in any subscribed apps (if you're silly enough to subscribe
rather than actually buy your apps).

As for Adobe ... that doesn’t seem to get much use in high-end content creation, so who cares?

Adobe is MAINLY used in "high-end content creation" such as magazines,
movies, TV, etc. to the point of almost being industry standard.

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.misc

On 2026-06-25 01:50:40 +0000, Lawrence D´Oliveiro said:

On Wed, 24 Jun 2026 17:35:22 +1200, Your Name wrote:

On 2026-06-24 01:24:17 +0000, Lawrence D´Oliveiro said:

Yeah, Linux is a proper Unix-type system, unlike that whatever it
is that Apple runs on its machines.

Technically, you've got that almost-backwards.

While on Thu, 25 Jun 2026 09:35:05 +1200, Your Name also wrote:

None of the standard software runs on it for a start - no Adobe, no
Microsoft, etc. ...

Interesting how you can claim, on the one hand, that Linux is not a
proper Unix-type system, yet the only examples you can offer of
software that won’t run on it is from companies that are not known for producing Unix-type software ...

Those are two separate statements with no connection. :-\

Besides which, those companies do sell software for MacOS, which
technically / legally is Unix.


--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.misc

On 2026-06-25 06:12:12 +0000, Nuno Silva said:

On 2026-06-25, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:

On Wed, 24 Jun 2026 17:35:22 +1200, Your Name wrote:

On 2026-06-24 01:24:17 +0000, Lawrence D´Oliveiro said:

Yeah, Linux is a proper Unix-type system, unlike that whatever it is
that Apple runs on its machines.

Technically, you've got that almost-backwards.

While on Thu, 25 Jun 2026 09:35:05 +1200, Your Name also wrote:

None of the standard software runs on it for a start - no Adobe, no
Microsoft, etc. ...

Interesting how you can claim, on the one hand, that Linux is not a
proper Unix-type system, yet the only examples you can offer of
software that won’t run on it is from companies that are not known for
producing Unix-type software ...

This really sounded like coming from one of these people who believe
that Microsoft and friends are somehow the gate-keepers of computing
and that The Microsoft Way™ is the original way - which is quite funny, given how that proprietary, closed source approach was something that
had to impose itself on an universe where the source wasn't that
hidden, from what I understand...

It's as if Microsoft succeeded in rewriting history to pretend that
their way is the way things have always been done, and pretending that open-sourced software is something novel that people are trying to push
as some sort of extremist move to displace "standard software houses",
and implying that it will never be mature enough or the like, despite
many such projects being more mature than Microsoft software, besides
older.

And there indeed are people who believe this, people who will accuse
FLOSS projects of merely trying to be "cheap copies" of proprietary software.

If you meant me, then I believe Microsoft is a crap company that has
zero ability to write decent software, especially for the Mac. Always
has been, always will be.

What I said was if you need full and reliable compatibility (or at
least as close as you can get) with others using those products, then
you have to use those products too, rather than supposed "compatible" alternatives which are never really *fully* compatible.


--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.misc

On 2026-06-25 05:55:22 +0000, Nuno Silva said:

On 2026-06-24, Your Name wrote:

On 2026-06-24 10:36:04 +0000, The Natural Philosopher said:

On 24/06/2026 06:45, Marc Haber wrote:

Technically, you've got that almost-backwards.

Linux is a "Unix-like" operating system. MacOS X is built on Darwin
derived from BSD, which is also another Unix-like operating system.
Although neither is true Unix, MacOS X is certified by Unix, while
Linux is not ... so legally MacOS X can call itself Unix and Linux
cannot.

Noone cares about the brand any more.

Exactly,. we have and operating system that works pretty well available >>> for free across many hardware platforms. With a cute little mascot.

Let's call it the Penguin Operating System (POS) and have done with it :-) >>

"PoS" is definitely he correct term for the numerous different Linux
varities. None of the standard software runs on it for a start - no
Adobe, no Microsoft, etc., so if you need to use any of those to be
fully compatible ("alternatives" are never fully compatible, despite
what they like to claim), then you need to use a proper operating
system: MacOS X.

And who declared Microsoft products "standard software"?

<snip>

Most of the business world did years ago ... believe me, I wish it wasn't so!



--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.misc

On Thu, 25 Jun 2026 18:27:36 +1200, Your Name wrote:

On 2026-06-25 01:50:40 +0000, Lawrence D´Oliveiro said:

On Wed, 24 Jun 2026 17:35:22 +1200, Your Name wrote:

On 2026-06-24 01:24:17 +0000, Lawrence D´Oliveiro said:

Yeah, Linux is a proper Unix-type system, unlike that whatever it
is that Apple runs on its machines.

Technically, you've got that almost-backwards.

While on Thu, 25 Jun 2026 09:35:05 +1200, Your Name also wrote:

None of the standard software runs on it for a start - no Adobe,
no Microsoft, etc. ...

Interesting how you can claim, on the one hand, that Linux is not a
proper Unix-type system, yet the only examples you can offer of
software that won’t run on it is from companies that are not known
for producing Unix-type software ...

Those are two separate statements with no connection. :-\

Strange. You were intending both of them to try to rebut the same
statement of mine. The fact that they contradict one another just
shows how weak your attempt at rebuttal is.

Besides which, those companies do sell software for MacOS, which
technically / legally is Unix.

Legally only.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.misc

On 2026-06-25 06:50:05 +0000, Lawrence D´Oliveiro said:

On Thu, 25 Jun 2026 18:27:36 +1200, Your Name wrote:

On 2026-06-25 01:50:40 +0000, Lawrence D´Oliveiro said:

On Wed, 24 Jun 2026 17:35:22 +1200, Your Name wrote:

On 2026-06-24 01:24:17 +0000, Lawrence D´Oliveiro said:

Yeah, Linux is a proper Unix-type system, unlike that whatever it
is that Apple runs on its machines.

Technically, you've got that almost-backwards.

While on Thu, 25 Jun 2026 09:35:05 +1200, Your Name also wrote:

None of the standard software runs on it for a start - no Adobe, no
Microsoft, etc. ...

Interesting how you can claim, on the one hand, that Linux is not a
proper Unix-type system, yet the only examples you can offer of
software that won’t run on it is from companies that are not known for >>> producing Unix-type software ...

Those are two separate statements with no connection. :-\

Strange. You were intending both of them to try to rebut the same
statement of mine. The fact that they contradict one another just shows
how weak your attempt at rebuttal is.

The can't possibly contradict each other since they are complete
separate and have no connection to each other, but believe whatever
nonsense you want to ... you obviously will anyway. :-\


--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.misc

On 25/06/2026 07:24, Your Name wrote:

On 2026-06-25 01:17:08 +0000, Lawrence D´Oliveiro said:

On Thu, 25 Jun 2026 09:35:05 +1200, Your Name wrote:

None of the standard software runs on [Linux] for a start - no Adobe,
no Microsoft, etc. ...

Microsoft 365 lists Linux as a supported platform, if you really want
that. (Most of us don’t.)

"Microsfot 365" will work in anything because it's browser based ...
until Microsoft "upgrades" so it no longer works in an old web browser.
It's best to steer well clear of such silliness, as well as turning OFF auto-updtes in any subscribed apps (if you're silly enough to subscribe rather than actually buy your apps).

As for Adobe ... that doesn’t seem to get much use in high-end content
creation, so who cares?

Adobe is MAINLY used in "high-end content creation" such as magazines, movies, TV, etc. to the point of almost being industry standard.

Yeah. It replaced Quark Express at least a decade ago. Having to make 'collections' of fonts and images to go with the formatted text was a
pain. PDFS embedded both.

Instead of sending a zip file to the printers, you sent a PDF


Sure, if you must run that stuff, you buy a Mac to run it on., Think of
it it as a standalone 'creative' machine, not a general purpose computer.

The OS is completely irrelevant really, You boot into creative suite and
stay there.

Same goes for high end CAD/CAM stuff. You never see the OS, only the application.
--
If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will
eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such
time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic
and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally
important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for
the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the
truth is the greatest enemy of the State.

Joseph Goebbels




--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.misc

On 2026-06-25 03:13, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:

On Wed, 24 Jun 2026 12:07:47 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:

On 2026-06-24 03:30, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:

On Sun, 21 Jun 2026 09:35:34 +0200, Marc Haber wrote:

This thread for some reason gave me 40 year old 6502 vibes, where
the only fully usable register is called the accumulator.

“Accumulator” was a common synonym for “register” in the early
days.

E.g. I think the PDP-10 had 4 accumulators. Their assembly-language
names were AC0, AC1, AC2, AC3.

An accumulator is not a register. It is different, you can do
operations on it.

Which one? What’s the point of having one where “you cannot do
operations on it”?

It just was so. The ALU wrote to the accumulator, not to other registers.
--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.
ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.misc

On 2026-06-25 08:27, Your Name wrote:

On 2026-06-25 01:50:40 +0000, Lawrence D´Oliveiro said:

On Wed, 24 Jun 2026 17:35:22 +1200, Your Name wrote:

On 2026-06-24 01:24:17 +0000, Lawrence D´Oliveiro said:

Yeah, Linux is a proper Unix-type system, unlike that whatever it
is that Apple runs on its machines.

Technically, you've got that almost-backwards.

While on Thu, 25 Jun 2026 09:35:05 +1200, Your Name also wrote:

None of the standard software runs on it for a start - no Adobe, no
Microsoft, etc. ...

Interesting how you can claim, on the one hand, that Linux is not a
proper Unix-type system, yet the only examples you can offer of
software that won’t run on it is from companies that are not known for
producing Unix-type software ...

Those are two separate statements with no connection.  :-\

Besides which, those companies do sell software for MacOS, which
technically / legally is Unix.

Unix with a big layer on top that is not Unix.

Is the graphic layer Unix? Do those companies that sell software for
macOS expect that particular graphical layer, or do they run directly on
the Unix beneath?
--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.
ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.misc

In article <111hii9$3b57f$1@dont-email.me>,
Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> wrote:

"PoS" is definitely he correct term for the numerous different Linux >varities. None of the standard software runs on it for a start - no
Adobe, no Microsoft, etc.

That could be (and probably should be) viewed as a feature, not a bug. :)
--
_/_
/ v \ Scott Alfter (remove the obvious to send mail)
(IIGS( https://alfter.us/ Top-posting!
\_^_/ >What's the most annoying thing on Usenet? --- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.misc

In article <20260624080106.00005d5f@gmail.com>,
John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> wrote:

Lawrence clearly does.

Placing this in ~/News/KILL will improve your Usenet experience:

/ldo@nz.invalid/f:j

HTH. :)
--
_/_
/ v \ Scott Alfter (remove the obvious to send mail)
(IIGS( https://alfter.us/ Top-posting!
\_^_/ >What's the most annoying thing on Usenet? --- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.misc

On 25/06/2026 03:14, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:

On Wed, 24 Jun 2026 17:15:58 +0200, John Bokma wrote:

On 24/06/2026 03:24, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:

On Fri, 19 Jun 2026 18:42:03 +0100, scole wrote:

I'm still finding my feet with Linux - there's a few strange
quirls to it that my Mac-shaped brain is struggling to cope with
...

Yeah, Linux is a proper Unix-type system, unlike that whatever it
is that Apple runs on its machines.

In what way?

One obvious one: a core part of the Unix tradition was separation of
the GUI from the OS kernel. Apple threw that one right out the window.

How?
--
Static tumblelog generator: https://github.com/john-bokma/tumblelog/
Available as Python or Perl. Example tumblelog: https://plurrrr.com/
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.misc

"Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> writes:

On 2026-06-25 08:27, Your Name wrote:

Those are two separate statements with no connection.  :-\
Besides which, those companies do sell software for MacOS, which
technically / legally is Unix.

Unix with a big layer on top that is not Unix.

Is the graphic layer Unix?

What would make a GUI API be ‘Unix’? I think all the popular GUI APIs
are cross-platform, at least to an extent.

Do those companies that sell software for macOS expect that particular graphical layer, or do they run directly on the Unix beneath?

Generally both. User interaction via the GUI, network and file IO etc
via the Unix syscall API (mediated via application frameworks, language runtimes, etc). It’s not conceptually different to GUI applications on
Linux and Windows.
--
https://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.misc

On Thu, 25 Jun 2026 11:26:47 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:

On 2026-06-25 03:13, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:

On Wed, 24 Jun 2026 12:07:47 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:

On 2026-06-24 03:30, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:

On Sun, 21 Jun 2026 09:35:34 +0200, Marc Haber wrote:

This thread for some reason gave me 40 year old 6502 vibes,
where the only fully usable register is called the accumulator.

“Accumulator” was a common synonym for “register” in the early >>>> days.

E.g. I think the PDP-10 had 4 accumulators. Their
assembly-language names were AC0, AC1, AC2, AC3.

An accumulator is not a register. It is different, you can do
operations on it.

Which one? What’s the point of having one where “you cannot do
operations on it”?

It just was so. The ALU wrote to the accumulator, not to other
registers.

There was also an older usage where “register” was a synonym for
“memory location”. You’re not using it in that sense, are you?
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.misc

On Thu, 25 Jun 2026 18:32:08 +0200, John Bokma wrote:

On 25/06/2026 03:14, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:

On Wed, 24 Jun 2026 17:15:58 +0200, John Bokma wrote:

On 24/06/2026 03:24, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:

Yeah, Linux is a proper Unix-type system, unlike that whatever it
is that Apple runs on its machines.

In what way?

One obvious one: a core part of the Unix tradition was separation
of the GUI from the OS kernel. Apple threw that one right out the
window.

How?

By integrating its GUI tightly into its OS kernel.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.misc

At Thu, 25 Jun 2026 23:22:35 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:

On Thu, 25 Jun 2026 18:32:08 +0200, John Bokma wrote:

On 25/06/2026 03:14, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:

On Wed, 24 Jun 2026 17:15:58 +0200, John Bokma wrote:

On 24/06/2026 03:24, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:

Yeah, Linux is a proper Unix-type system, unlike that whatever it
is that Apple runs on its machines.

In what way?

One obvious one: a core part of the Unix tradition was separation
of the GUI from the OS kernel. Apple threw that one right out the
window.

How?

By integrating its GUI tightly into its OS kernel.

This has already been explained to you.

The OS kernel on a Mac is Darwin:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darwin_(operating_system)

https://www.puredarwin.org/

...but you're some kind of concern/Poe troll that is completely
intractable regarding MacOS.

And while you are fond of using the term *nix, there's nothing
wrong with saying "Unix" or "a Unix" to describe POSIX operating
systems like Linux or FreeBSD -- because those are not trademarks.
(Another term of art is "Unix-like".)

https://www.fosslinux.com/44623/top-unix-based-operating-systems.htm

UNIX(r), though, is a trademark. All-caps, with an (r) to
make sure you know those people Really Mean Business (oh yes).

Now go forth and sin no more.
--
-v System76 Thelio Mega v1.1 x86_64 Mem: 258G
OS: Linux 7.1.1 D: Mint 22.3 DE: Xfce 4.18 (X11)
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090Ti (24G) (610.43.02)
"A cynic smells flowers and looks for the casket."
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.misc

On Thu, 25 Jun 2026 18:34:01 +1200, Your Name wrote:

On 2026-06-25 05:55:22 +0000, Nuno Silva said:

And who declared Microsoft products "standard software"?

<snip>

Most of the business world did years ago ...

Is this the same “business world” that has largely moved its
operations into the cloud these days? The cloud that is dominated by
Linux?
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.misc

On Thu, 25 Jun 2026 18:24:43 +1200, Your Name wrote:

On 2026-06-25 01:17:08 +0000, Lawrence D´Oliveiro said:

On Thu, 25 Jun 2026 09:35:05 +1200, Your Name wrote:

None of the standard software runs on [Linux] for a start - no
Adobe, no Microsoft, etc. ...

Microsoft 365 lists Linux as a supported platform, if you really
want that. (Most of us don’t.)

"Microsfot 365" will work in anything because it's browser based ...
until Microsoft "upgrades" so it no longer works in an old web
browser. It's best to steer well clear of such silliness ...

But you were the one quoting Microsoft as an example of the sine qua
non of app support, weren’t you? Now you’re advising steering clear of
them as “silliness” ...

As for Adobe ... that doesn’t seem to get much use in high-end
content creation, so who cares?

Adobe is MAINLY used in "high-end content creation" such as magazines, movies, TV, etc. to the point of almost being industry standard.

Not really, no. Example: artists in the VFX industry mainly have Linux workstations on their desks. Not much Adobe software runs on them.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.misc

On 2026-06-26 01:57:11 +0000, Lawrence D´Oliveiro said:

On Thu, 25 Jun 2026 18:34:01 +1200, Your Name wrote:

On 2026-06-25 05:55:22 +0000, Nuno Silva said:

And who declared Microsoft products "standard software"?

<snip>

Most of the business world did years ago ...

Is this the same “business world” that has largely moved its
operations into the cloud these days? The cloud that is dominated by
Linux?

I think you need to get out into the real world more often, rather than sitting in your own deluisonal little room by yourself. :-\

Another idiot added to the killfile.

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.misc

On 2026-06-26, vallor wrote:

At Thu, 25 Jun 2026 23:22:35 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:

On Thu, 25 Jun 2026 18:32:08 +0200, John Bokma wrote:

On 25/06/2026 03:14, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:

On Wed, 24 Jun 2026 17:15:58 +0200, John Bokma wrote:

On 24/06/2026 03:24, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:

Yeah, Linux is a proper Unix-type system, unlike that whatever it
is that Apple runs on its machines.

In what way?

One obvious one: a core part of the Unix tradition was separation
of the GUI from the OS kernel. Apple threw that one right out the
window.

How?

By integrating its GUI tightly into its OS kernel.

This has already been explained to you.

The OS kernel on a Mac is Darwin:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darwin_(operating_system)

https://www.puredarwin.org/

...but you're some kind of concern/Poe troll that is completely
intractable regarding MacOS.

And while you are fond of using the term *nix, there's nothing
wrong with saying "Unix" or "a Unix" to describe POSIX operating
systems like Linux or FreeBSD -- because those are not trademarks.
(Another term of art is "Unix-like".)

https://www.fosslinux.com/44623/top-unix-based-operating-systems.htm

UNIX(r), though, is a trademark. All-caps, with an (r) to
make sure you know those people Really Mean Business (oh yes).

Now go forth and sin no more.

But to go Forth, it probably helps to have an Apple PowerPC machine :-P
--
Nuno Silva
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.misc

On 2026-06-26, Your Name wrote:

On 2026-06-26 01:57:11 +0000, Lawrence D´Oliveiro said:

On Thu, 25 Jun 2026 18:34:01 +1200, Your Name wrote:

On 2026-06-25 05:55:22 +0000, Nuno Silva said:

And who declared Microsoft products "standard software"?

<snip>

Most of the business world did years ago ...

Is this the same “business world” that has largely moved its
operations into the cloud these days? The cloud that is dominated by
Linux?

I think you need to get out into the real world more often, rather
than sitting in your own deluisonal little room by yourself. :-\

Another idiot added to the killfile.

I think relativism from your part would improve matters too. It's not
even a de facto standard the way you stated it, the business world is
not synonymous with reality, and it may also have parts which blur the distinction between reality and beliefs (where corporate decisionmakers
put money in what they think reality is, out of some belief).

Just for one example: the tech world pretty much has as a sort of
guideline, if not "standard", that you don't top-post and you don't
destroy threading (by properly maintaining and extending References and In-Reply-To), and that you clearly denote quoted material with a quoting
level indicator on the left side. But some on the corporate world think differently, and at least one company (MICROS~1) has tried to push hard
their own incompatible and problematic approach to e-mail, possibly
arising out of some metaphor with paper documents flowing in an
office. That Microsoft chose to go with that doesn't make it a standard,
even though the disease (I'd avoid this wording, except this is about top-posting and lack of quoting levels and mangling references, so I'll
go with "disease") spreads because of them.

Heck, the tech world even has a solution to make plain text e-mails
reflowable.

The business world also includes companies who know better than using
Microsoft products and services (again, I'd use another wording, but
Microsoft has actively done so much damage...)


What follows is in case somebody thinks I'm exaggerating about
Microsoft, and regards the above as, I don't know, "fanboyism"...; Also,
in case somebody needs to be aware of these things:

Bill Gates wants to introduce hardware incompatibilities using ACPI: <http://web.archive.org/web/1if_/http://www.iowaconsumercase.org/011607/3000/PX03020.pdf>

Microsoft's FUD:
<https://enwp.org/Halloween_papers#List_of_documents>

So you want to do e-mail with Microsoft? If your server doesn't send a
lot of e-mail, it might get blocked (yes, you read that right, you may
have to spam more, not less).

<news://news.gmane.io/YyGtAsSxjpA0Ky4+@lazarescu.org> <http://web.archive.org/web/20210225102644/https://guides.downstate.edu/c.php?g=654922&p=4870487>

Some messages will be sent to Quarantine, which users may have not heard
about. And I'm not even sure SmartScreen won't possibly just drop
messages completely without sending to Quarantine.

<http://web.archive.org/web/20210225102644/https://guides.downstate.edu/c.php?g=654922&p=4870487>
<https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/answers/questions/357214/emails-to-microsoft-365-customers-are-silently-dro>
<https://www.nerd-quickies.net/2020/10/20/microsoft-silently-dropping-emails-a-sad-but-true-story/>
--
Nuno Silva
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.misc

On 2026-06-26 01:21, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:

On Thu, 25 Jun 2026 11:26:47 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:

On 2026-06-25 03:13, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:

On Wed, 24 Jun 2026 12:07:47 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:

On 2026-06-24 03:30, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:

On Sun, 21 Jun 2026 09:35:34 +0200, Marc Haber wrote:

This thread for some reason gave me 40 year old 6502 vibes,
where the only fully usable register is called the accumulator.

“Accumulator” was a common synonym for “register” in the early >>>>> days.

E.g. I think the PDP-10 had 4 accumulators. Their
assembly-language names were AC0, AC1, AC2, AC3.

An accumulator is not a register. It is different, you can do
operations on it.

Which one? What’s the point of having one where “you cannot do
operations on it”?

It just was so. The ALU wrote to the accumulator, not to other
registers.

There was also an older usage where “register” was a synonym for “memory location”. You’re not using it in that sense, are you?

Nono, just some storage inside the CPU.


Later processors, like the 68000, could receive results on any register.
--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.
ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.misc

On 2026-06-25, Carlos E. R. wrote:

[...]

Unix with a big layer on top that is not Unix.

Is the graphic layer Unix? Do those companies that sell software for
macOS expect that particular graphical layer, or do they run directly
on the Unix beneath?

[ Ariana Richards / Lex enters the room ]
--
Nuno Silva
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.misc

On 26/06/2026 09:55, Carlos E. R. wrote:

On 2026-06-26 01:21, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:

On Thu, 25 Jun 2026 11:26:47 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:

On 2026-06-25 03:13, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:

On Wed, 24 Jun 2026 12:07:47 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:

On 2026-06-24 03:30, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:

On Sun, 21 Jun 2026 09:35:34 +0200, Marc Haber wrote:

This thread for some reason gave me 40 year old 6502 vibes,
where the only fully usable register is called the accumulator.

“Accumulator” was a common synonym for “register” in the early >>>>>> days.

E.g. I think the PDP-10 had 4 accumulators. Their
assembly-language names were AC0, AC1, AC2, AC3.

An accumulator is not a register. It is different, you can do
operations on it.

Which one? What’s the point of having one where “you cannot do
operations on it”?

It just was so. The ALU wrote to the accumulator, not to other
registers.

There was also an older usage where “register” was a synonym for
“memory location”. You’re not using it in that sense, are you?

Nono, just some storage inside the CPU.

No. In some architectures its in memory

Later processors, like the 68000, could receive results on any register.

And more importantly some other CPUs did not really make a distinction
between RAM and onboard registers.

ISTR that Turing's original theoretical machine only had, in effect, an instruction pointer.

It's perfectly possible to construct a CPU that has only one 'register'
- a frame pointer pointing to a frame in which all the RAM based
registers are to be found. Arguably even this is not necessary, as you
could reserve a fixed piece of RAM to contain that data.

It's merely a matter of speed. And modern CPUS map huge areas of RAM
into cache 'registers' anyway. The distinction is very blurred

It represents te perfect dichotomy between the idealisations of the
'computer scientist' and the fundamental realities of engineering a blisteringly fast machine to process serial intsructions
--
The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to
rule.
– H. L. Mencken, American journalist, 1880-1956

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.misc

On 2026-06-26, Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:

On Thu, 25 Jun 2026 18:34:01 +1200, Your Name wrote:

On 2026-06-25 05:55:22 +0000, Nuno Silva said:

And who declared Microsoft products "standard software"?

<snip>

Most of the business world did years ago ...

Is this the same “business world” that has largely moved its
operations into the cloud these days? The cloud that is dominated
by Linux?

Shhhhh... don't say that too loudly. Bill might not like it.
--
/~\ Charlie Gibbs | They don't understand Microsoft
\ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | has stolen their car and parked
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | a taxi in their driveway.
/ \ if you read it the right way. | -- Mayayana
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2