[SledgeHammer]

A Linux based Windows is certainly not my "fantasy". As far as I'm concerned MS can keep the fingers out of the Linux pie completely. I've just commented on Linux/MS links that have been reported in the tech press. Fine with me if it never happens, but MS is obviously looking at Linux just as they looked at Chromium and eventually adopted it for Edge. Neither one of us has any idea when or if MS might move ahead with a Linux based product.

What does Chromium have to do with Linux? Internet Explorer was damaged goods and they had 3 choices. Get out of the browser market, use an existing engine or write their own. Writing their own wouldn't make financial sense. Quite frankly, I don't know why they didn't exit the browser market as Edge is pretty much about as popular as Linux is for home use. Its got 5% market share. Firefox has 8% and Safari has 9%. Chrome has 77%.

Microsoft obviously isn't moving Windows to Linux lol. First it would cost too much and take too long. Second of all, what's the point? 3rd of all, you'd break all sorts of backwards compatibility. Just look at the open source attempt to port the Windows API to Linux. So many apps don't work on it and they've been at it for 30 yrs. And forth of all, for the millionth time, nobody uses Linux at home (2% market share) and nobody is going to want to learn all the cryptic command lines. If Microsoft wasn't willing to re-write a browser engine, what makes you think they'd want to re-write an OS? Internet Explorer was damaged goods. Windows has like 80% market share as it is and NONE of that has gone to Linux.

 

[harsh]

You seriously have no clue what you're talking about. Windows & Mac & iOS use UTF-16. Also Linux has support UTF-16 for ages.

Don't confuse "support" with "use" or "default". The default text encoding on the Mac OS is UTF-8 (it used to be CP1252). It makes it nice since UTF-8 encoding ends up being unencoded if you aren't doing anything out of the ordinary (for English speakers anyway). That most certainly can't be said about UTF-16.

Lol. No, not every needs or has a NAS.

I suppose there are some that can go through life and produce next to nothing worth saving or sharing.

Lol, so how do you differentiate file types?

Because few of the encodings have identifying headers, it isn't easy. With my code, I just try various approaches and see what happens. Looking for telltale excape sequences is only partially useful.

Date formatting is also difficult and Windows typically uses a deeply buried OS parameter to determine the date format and "good" programs are expected to use it. Unfortunately, that format is determined by locale rather than across the platform. Don't get me started on the epoch date confusion where NTFS uses January 1, 1601 (the most recent start of the Gregorian calendar cycle) but .NET uses January 1, 1, DOS used 1/1/1980 and Excel uses 1/1/1900 (an homage to Lotus 1-2-3). Regular expressions are huge here for both identification and reformatting (to something POSIX).

Don't worry, I won't since they serve completely different purposes.

They're both actively used Windows file systems with FAT32 arguably being the preferred format for exchange with other platforms using USB drives. Exchange of information is key in the quest for collaboration and understanding.

Here's another example where you seriously have no clue what you're talking about.

You must have this phrase stuck on your clipboard. It appears a lot in your posts where you're about to spew forth a bilious and/or inaccurate retort.

First off, I specifically mentioned the IBM PC, not some dinosaur mainframe you grew up on with punch cards.

My second work computer was a Televideo 80286 "server" (complete with IBM PC AT expansion slots) running Xenix (Microsoft's version of *nix in a valiant attempt to be taken seriously in the computing world). It supported terminals (what with Televideo being a popular terminal manufacturer) but was by all accounts a microcomputer. Storage was provided by an ESDI-connected 5.25" full-height hard drive and a DC300 tape drive for backup. It didn't support Hollerith cards or punch tape.

Turbo C was a Borland product btw.

Duh. My point was that Borland C/C++ wasn't a thing until after Windows came on the scene, not with the introduction of the IBM PC as you asserted.

This explains why you are so out of touch with reality lol.

Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it -- Winston Churchill.

Reality changes with time but it is how we approach those changes that determines whether we step forward or just change for the sake of some other company's bottom line. Imagine where we might be if the benchmarks for computing goodness weren't the ability to run Flight Simulator and Lotus 1-2-3 back in the mid 1980s.

I well remember the wide-eyed Turbo Pascal fanboys trying to find work back in the day. They were going to take over the world with their IDEs and speedy executables only to learn that the real world was using something much different (BASIC, FORTRAN, COBOL).

 

[harsh]

What does Chromium have to do with Linux?

The better question is "what does using Chromium say about Microsoft's future?".

What doors does it open and does anyone stand to lose?

Market share is for lemmings.

 

[SledgeHammer]

Don't confuse "support" with "use" or "default". The default text encoding on the Mac OS is UTF-8 (it used to be CP1252). It makes it nice since UTF-8 encoding ends up being unencoded if you aren't doing anything out of the ordinary (for English speakers anyway). That most certainly can't be said about UTF-16.

Don't confuse "not the default" with "not set up properly".

I suppose there are some that can go through life and produce next to nothing worth saving or sharing.

You need a NAS to share or save things? News to the 95% of the population that doesn't have a NAS. How do you share your things with the world via a NAS? Ever heard of network shares? Or Github? Anybody who wants to save and/or share any source code is using Github, not your NAS. Since you hate Windows and Microsoft so much, weird that you apparently haven't heard of the Google Docs suite that people using for sharing docs of various kinds. You might have trouble identifying the specific kind though since you apparently hate file extensions too.

Because few of the encodings have identifying headers, it isn't easy. With my code, I just try various approaches and see what happens. Looking for telltale excape sequences is only partially useful.

UTF-8 is "default" and UTF-16 is automatically identified by the header. Other file types are generally identified by standardized extensions and headers.

"try various approaches and see what happens" isn't a very useful approach to life or software development.

Date formatting is also difficult and Windows typically uses a deeply buried OS parameter to determine the date format and "good" programs are expected to use it. Unfortunately, that format is determined by locale rather than across the platform. Don't get me started on the epoch date confusion where NTFS uses January 1, 1601 (the most recent start of the Gregorian calendar cycle) but .NET uses January 1, 1, DOS used 1/1/1980 and Excel uses 1/1/1900 (an homage to Lotus 1-2-3).

Wrong again. Date/time formatting / parsing is trivial. Try using a modern library / framework instead of trying to roll your own with regex and you wouldn't be working on it for a week or two as you claim. You'd work on it for a few minutes since its a one liner in most modern frameworks. Most modern applications can also automatically identify the format. Excel surely can. So can C# and Java and Python and any other modern programming languages.

Regular expressions are huge here for both identification and reformatting (to something POSIX).

This is why you have so many problems and difficulties with your code and in life it seems. Regex is most definitely NOT a solution for everything. You should use the appropriate libraries that take care of all these things for you. Not roll your own. Unless of course your intention is to roll your own for learning purposes and or doing something that hasn't been done a million times already. Date / time parsing & formatting has been done a million times and certainly not through Regex since that wouldn't be able to handle all the edge cases.

They're both actively used Windows file systems with FAT32 arguably being the preferred format for exchange with other platforms using USB drives. Exchange of information is key in the quest for collaboration and understanding.

File systems are transparent in most cases.

It appears a lot in your posts where you're about to spew forth a bilious and/or inaccurate retort.

Actually, it is YOU that is regarded as the biggest troll on here. Even the mods have referred to you as a disturbing force.

My point was that Borland C/C++ wasn't a thing until after Windows came on the scene, not with the introduction of the IBM PC as you asserted.

Where did I say Borland C/C++ came out with the IBM PC? Borland C++ and Turbo C++ were two different products. Although both were Borland.

Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it -- Winston Churchill.

So why do you continue to post about things you clearly have no clue about? Myself, MANY other posters and most of the mods have also called you out on that. Again, you've been referred to by the mods as a disturbance to the forums.

I well remember the wide-eyed Turbo Pascal fanboys trying to find work back in the day.

Pascal was never a thing in industry. Same as Visual Basic was never a thing in industry. Those were languages that were popular with hobbyists / students only.

to learn that the real world was using something much different

Strange that you don't follow that mantra. You've made so many ridiculous claims in this thread and don't use anything popular or common it seems. Sorry, Linux isn't popular or common for home use.

 

[SledgeHammer]

The better question is "what does using Chromium say about Microsoft's future?".

What doors does it open and does anyone stand to lose?

Who said it did? Edge has about the same penetration as Linux.

Market share is for lemmings.

Weird comment since you're always asking for numbers and stats and that's what most people and companies on planet earth use.

 

[harsh]

From day one of the IBM PC in 1983, the main programming language was C. First Borland C/C++, then when Microsoft took over it became Visual C/C++

Where did I say Borland C/C++ came out with the IBM PC? Borland C++ and Turbo C++ were two different products. Although both were Borland.

Any questions?

Pascal was never a thing in industry. Same as Visual Basic was never a thing in industry. Those were languages that were popular with hobbyists / students only.

Pascal was Apple's official development platform for the Mac (and the only way to access early Apple hard drives) for some time as I stated.

You've just come into the game much to late to have seen the progression and be passing judgement on others based on your limited exposure.

 

[SledgeHammer]

Any questions?

Yes. Are your reading skills as bad as your coding skills? I said "From day one of the IBM PC in 1983, the main programming language was C" the EXACT line which you quoted. Then there's a period. Then I said Borland was the most popular C/C++ compiler and then Microsoft took over. A period generally is used to identify the end of a sentence. You must have missed that with your regex. If you are talking about the compiler that came with the XT, I believe that was IBM C, but Borland was the one that really took off.

You've just come into the game much to late to have seen the progression and be passing judgement on others based on your limited exposure.

Wrong again. I've been a software engineer for 30 yrs and using computers even longer then that back to the 80s. I've just evolved with the times. You clearly have not and you're stuck on what you did 20 yrs ago which is largely irrelevant. As a matter of fact, stuff from like 3-5 yrs ago is largely irrelevant today.

You also seem to live in an alternate reality where you don't use a cell phone, but everybody has a NAS and is recompiling Linux kernels at home and transferring files across 17 different systems.

 

[harsh]

Then I said Borland was the most popular C/C++ compiler and then Microsoft took over.

You didn't say "then there was Borland C". You literally said "First Borland C/C++." "First" literally means that there was no other before it. There were many development tools used before Borland C (or even Turbo C) came onto the scene. Many, if not most, were not C.

My experience with computers and programming goes back to the late 1970s. I've seen a lot and I've learned a lot by keeping an open mind rather than having Microsoft (or Apple) telling me how things are.

As a matter of fact, stuff from like 3-5 yrs ago is largely irrelevant today.

Not irrelevant, just not what Microsoft recommended. Five years ago, Java was the hot ticket (but Microsoft was pushing C# and .NET hard). Today the list of preferred programming languages is topped by two scripting languages (Javascript circa 1995 and Python circa 2000). The fact that Microsoft hired Guido van Rossum should tell you something. Clearly neither is really suitable for writing Windows applications but that may be telling in where the industry is headed: multi-platform versus monolithic Windows desktop applications.

 

[SledgeHammer]

You didn't say "then there was Borland C". You literally said "First Borland C/C++." "First" literally means that there was no other before it. There were many development tools used before Borland C (or even Turbo C) came onto the scene. Many, if not most, were not C.

First as in mainstream.

My experience with computers and programming goes back to the late 1970s. I've seen a lot and I've learned a lot by keeping an open mind rather than having Microsoft (or Apple) telling me how things are.

You're the most close minded person I've ever met lol. You even contradicted yourself in that comment.

Not irrelevant, just not what Microsoft recommended.

People stopped caring about what Microsoft recommends at least a decade or more ago. Outside of Windows & Office, they are largely irrelevant to the average person. They are also largely irrelevant in software development since most companies aren't using Microsoft tech since it doesn't scale well.

Five years ago, Java was the hot ticket (but Microsoft was pushing C# and .NET hard).

Java has been the hot ticket a lot longer then that and is still the hot ticket for backend work. If you want to work at a tech company, you aren't using C# and .NET since, well, ever.

Today the list of preferred programming languages is topped by two scripting languages (Javascript circa 1995 and Python circa 2000). The fact that Microsoft hired Guido van Rossum should tell you something. Clearly neither is really suitable for writing Windows applications but that may be telling in where the industry is headed: multi-platform versus monolithic Windows desktop applications.

Thick client development has gone the way of the dodo bird.

Ever heard the expression "right tool for the right job"?

Most popular language for backend work is Java/Spring with newer code bases on Spring Boot and some places are experimenting with Kotlin, which was hot for a few seconds, but doesn't seem to have gained much traction.
Most popular language for ML & Data Science is Python
Most popular language for front-end work is Javascript
I'm not into mobile development, but I believe for iOS its either Objective-C or Swift

 

[harsh]

First as in mainstream.

Not there either. Aztec C and Lattice C were right there near launch along with other name brands like Intel and Watcom. Turbo C came along to save Borland's bacon as Turbo Pascal was losing steam along with CP/M. The fact is that C wasn't all that popular for personal computers (DOS or CP/M) in 1983.

Java has been the hot ticket a lot longer then that and is still the hot ticket for backend work.

For some, but faster and more reliable compiled languages (i.e. Rust, Go) are making big headway. I find Rust to be ever so slightly less obtuse as compared with Go.

Ever heard the expression "right tool for the right job"?

Sure. I've also heard the expression "when all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail".

 

[SledgeHammer]

Not there either. Aztec C and Lattice C were right there near launch along with other name brands like Intel and

You clearly don't understand what the word mainstream means.

Watcom. Turbo C came along to save Borland's bacon as Turbo Pascal was losing steam along with CP/M. The fact is that C wasn't all that popular for personal computers (DOS or CP/M) in 1983.

The internet would disagree with you as C surpassed Pascal by 1985 and stayed on top until the early 2000s. By comparison, Pascal was only on top for a measly 5 years. Also if you were on Apple, the most popular language at the time was Objective C.

For some, but faster and more reliable compiled languages (i.e. Rust, Go) are making big headway. I find Rust to be ever so slightly less obtuse as compared with Go.

No, they're not. They're only making a small dent with unicorns. They're currently ranked #9 & #10, while Python is #1 & Java #2 and Javascript #3.

 

[harsh]

You clearly don't understand what the word mainstream means.

You clearly don't understand that C wasn't the preferred development tool for the IBM PC in 1983. If C wasn't the preferred tool, it is probably not possible for any C compiler to be considered mainstream.

 

[SledgeHammer]

You clearly don't understand that C wasn't the preferred development tool for the IBM PC in 1983. If C wasn't the preferred tool, it is probably not possible for any C compiler to be considered mainstream.

You clearly don't understand what the word preferred means either.

Seeing as the XT shipped with a C compiler, you're wrong, as usual. As was your claim that C didn't take off til "well into the 90s" when it was the top language by 1985.

 

[harsh]

Seeing as the XT shipped with a C compiler, you're wrong, as usual.

Seeing as the XT didn't make an appearance until two years after the PC, you're bending the timeline yet again.

As was your claim that C didn't take off til "well into the 90s" when it was the top language by 1985.

My '90s reference was with respect to when Borland C/C++ became available (in response to one of your numerous whoppers).

Just because a computer ships with something doesn't make it desirable or mainstream. DOSSHELL (shipped with MS/PC-DOS 4.0 and one of the few interactive "applications" that shipped with DOS) is a classic example of this. DOSSHELL arguably didn't catch fire until it became Windows Explorer.

The IBM PC and IBM PC XT both came with "IBM BASIC" (a branded version of the then ubiquitous Microsoft BASIC interpreter) in ROM (just like the Atari 8-bits, the Apple ][, the Commodore PET, Vic-20, 64 and others). I see no evidence that either PC-DOS or MS-DOS ever shipped with a C compiler of any kind. There were no compiler options listed for the IBM PC by IBM.

The first IBM PC that I laid hands on was purchased with a FORTRAN compiler as that was what was hot at the time. Others were ordered with COBOL systems.

 

[SledgeHammer]

My '90s reference was with respect to when Borland C/C++ became available

Wrong again. Borland released a C/C++ compiler in May 1990. Hardly "well into the 90s". IBM released theirs in 1985 which was a rebadged Microsoft compiler which was released in 1983. Say, right around the time C became the top language in the world. All your timelines are off by about a decade.

Just because a computer ships with something doesn't make it desirable or mainstream. DOSSHELL (shipped with MS/PC-DOS 4.0 and one of the few interactive "applications" that shipped with DOS) is a classic example of this. DOSSHELL arguably didn't catch fire until it became Windows Explorer.

Uh, PC-DOS/MS-DOS were extremely popular. No, not everything that ships with everything is desirable or popular. That's why we have those two words, to describe things that are.

The IBM PC and IBM PC XT both came with "IBM BASIC" (a branded version of the then ubiquitous Microsoft BASIC interpreter) in ROM (just like the Atari 8-bits, the Apple ][, the Commodore PET, Vic-20, 64 and others). I see no evidence that either PC-DOS or MS-DOS ever shipped with a C compiler of any kind. There were no compiler options listed for the IBM PC by IBM.

Wrong yet again. It came with IBM C.

The first IBM PC that I laid hands on was purchased with a FORTRAN compiler as that was what was hot at the time. Others were ordered with COBOL systems.

You are again confusing what Harsh thinks is relevant or popular with what the rest of the planet does. I'm yet to see ANYTHING you've mentioned or use or do or think to be relevant, popular or mainstream. You're the exact opposite of all those words.

You don't use a cell phone, you compile linux kernels, you use linux, you don't use Windows, or Office. You use regex to parse dates and files (rather poorly it seems), you think everybody has or needs a Nas, you don't use github, you don't use file extensions, all the languages you've mentioned were largely niche things or only used in business, etc. I could go on and on. Heck, even your choice of dog breed isn't even in the top 25.

Your comment about how Java "was" the hot ticket is probably your most absurd comment yet.

Your hobby of trolling DirecTV forums and becoming an "expert" on a service you've never had is also an indication of your lack of understanding of what the average person does. That activity is most definitely not mainstream.

 

[harsh]

Wrong again. Borland released a C/C++ compiler in May 1990. Hardly "well into the 90s". IBM released theirs in 1985 which was a rebadged Microsoft compiler which was released in 1983. Say, right around the time C became the top language in the world. All your timelines are off by about a decade.

How does a C compiler that was released in 1985 (or even 1983) ship with a computer that was released in 1981?

What would have been the point of including C compiler with PC/MS-DOS? My recollection was that C was mostly an academic language on platforms other than Unix in 1981.

You produce a lot of information that isn't backed up with documentation. How much of it is true versus how much is made up or misremembered?

Uh, PC-DOS/MS-DOS were extremely popular.

They became popular ultimately but not on your timeline. Of course you're surreptitiously morphing the context of the discussion by claiming popularity of the operating system versus the popularity of the tools used to write applications for that platform.

Wrong yet again. It came with IBM C.

And your proof of this is?

From IBM's own Product Fact Sheet:

System Software
BASIC Interpreter -- Based on the popular Microsoft Basic and offered in three versions -- cassette, diskette and advanced.
The cassette level is included in the read-only memory of every system and provides input/output instructions needed to enter and retrieve data. It also supports use of the keyboard, display, light pen and printer and provides a full complement of editing and mathematical functions.
The diskette and advanced levels are optional. The diskette extension supports the use of diskettes, while adding date, time of day and communications capabilities to the system. The advanced extension enhances the display graphics to include features such as point, circle and get/put display, while increasing light pen and joy stick support for design work and home entertainment.
Disk Operating System (DOS) -- DOS supports one or more diskette drives, allowing the user to write or read from the system's removable diskettes, display a directory and rename, erase, display or copy files.
Pascal Compiler -- This language compiler allows separate compilations of program elements for maximum system performance. In addition, it supports several programming features for advanced programming work.
CP/M-86* and UCSD p-System* -- IBM has contracted with Digital Research, Inc. and Sof- Tech Microsystems, Inc. to make CP/M-86 and the UCSD p-System available for the IBM Personal Computer. We expect their availability will provide the opportunity for many current applications to be transferred to the IBM Personal Computer with minimal modifications.

Careful readers will note the conspicuous absence of a C compiler.

I can't imagine what it would be like to use a C compiler with a single 160K floppy drive not much RAM. I'm going to assume that a compiler wasn't an option with the cassette tape storage based systems with 16K of RAM.

You are again confusing what Harsh thinks is relevant or popular with what the rest of the planet does. I'm yet to see ANYTHING you've mentioned or use or do or think to be relevant, popular or mainstream. You're the exact opposite of all those words.

We all have our experiences. I've been designing and writing software since 1977, not just coding.

You don't use a cell phone, you compile linux kernels, you use linux, you don't use Windows, or Office.

You're making things up and in the style that you seem to favor, you're wrong yet again. I own a wireless smart phone (but only use it occasionally), I don't compile Linux kernels, and I do use Windows for some things (like my income taxes).

You use regex to parse dates and files (rather poorly it seems),

What would you recommend if the need is to parse dates not covered by POSIX and with the full understanding that the universal Windows date is based on seconds elapsed since January 1, 1601? One of the formats I'm dealing with manifests as this: Mon 16 January 09:54 2012 UTC. You have to recognize it before you can parse it (and you can't be serious about piping everything through Excel to parse the dates for you).

Windows itself produces dates in dozens of different formats (based on both the chosen locale and settings within that locale).

you think everybody has or needs a Nas,

Need may be too strong. Everyone who has more than a couple of computers or devices connected by a LAN could benefit from a NAS.

you don't use github,

I do use git for some things but I have my own git server. On the scale that I'm currently developing and at this stage, collaboration and versioning aren't major concerns. I happily use code and information hosted by github.

... and all the languages you've mentioned were largely niche things or only used in business, etc.

So you're insisting that business computing is irrelevant and it has no place on IBM compatibles. What do the projects that you participate in create code for?

I could go on and on.

The issue is neither your endurance nor your willingness to look the fool. The question is will you ever impress anyone with your inaccurate "facts" and generously sprinkled personal attacks.

Your comment about how Java "was" the hot ticket is probably your most absurd comment yet.

Show me a site that tracks such things that doesn't show Java on the wane and we'll talk. Stack Exchange puts Java at #7 and PYPL puts it at #2 but they don't offer much the way of context.

Berkeley lists a top eleven most "in demand" programming languages and it places Java at #5 behind (in order) Javascript, Python, HTML and CSS. They include C# but omit C and C++ in favor of Rust, Perl and Go. Of course those who are writing applications or gaming software probably aren't going to be using scripting languages but "in demand" surely comes down to what pays the bills.

BTW, the AKC lists the top 197 breeds and the Basset Hound comes in at #34. Do you (or would you) own a Lab simply because that breed is #1 on the definitive list of top breeds?

 

[SledgeHammer]

How does a C compiler that was released in 1985 (or even 1983) ship with a computer that was released in 1981?

What would have been the point of including C compiler with PC/MS-DOS? My recollection was that C was mostly an academic language on platforms other than Unix in 1981.

Careful readers (not you apparently) would note that nobody ever mentioned 1981 except you. I mentioned 1983. But nice (poor) attempt on manipulating the facts.

You produce a lot of information that isn't backed up with documentation. How much of it is true versus how much is made up or misremembered?

I think you're referring to yourself here. All my comments are well documented on the internet. Ever heard of it?

They became popular ultimately but not on your timeline. Of course you're surreptitiously morphing the context of the discussion by claiming popularity of the operating system versus the popularity of the tools used to write applications for that platform.

I've already proven multiple times that your time line is off by a decade. Whether you accept reality isn't my concern. I know it interferes with your trolling though.

I can't imagine what it would be like to use a C compiler with a single 160K floppy drive not much RAM. I'm going to assume that a compiler wasn't an option with the cassette tape storage based systems with 16K of RAM.

Wrong again, they had dual 360kb floppies. Cassette tape? Now you're just making stuff up to just troll. PCs had floppys and later hard drive. You're confusing history with your VIC-20.

16K of RAM? You need to stop smoking weed or whatever other drug you're using. The XT had 640KB which was plenty to run a C compiler.

I've been designing and writing software since 1977, not just coding.

Total BS. You're not a software engineer and never have been. You're a desktop support guy / hobbyist / hack. Software engineers don't use regex to parse dates & files. Never have, never will. There are established libraries and formats for all of this.

I own a wireless smart phone (but only use it occasionally)

You have a "wireless smart phone"??? LOL... as opposed to a non wireless one? The rest of us on planet earth use them exclusively. You're confusing things with your landline.

What would you recommend if the need is to parse dates not covered by POSIX and with the full understanding that the universal Windows date is based on seconds elapsed since January 1, 1601? One of the formats I'm dealing with manifests as this: Mon 16 January 09:54 2012 UTC. You have to recognize it before you can parse it (and you can't be serious about piping everything through Excel to parse the dates for you).

More evidence you're not a software engineer or coder, or even a hack. That's a standard format recognized by any modern library.

Windows itself produces dates in dozens of different formats (based on both the chosen locale and settings within that locale).

Wrong again. You're confusing storage / display. Again, you're not a software engineer.

Need may be too strong. Everyone who has more than a couple of computers or devices connected by a LAN could benefit from a NAS.

Really? tell us what you store on yours.

I do use git for some things but I have my own git server. On the scale that I'm currently developing and at this stage, collaboration and versioning aren't major concerns.

Yet more evidence you're not a software engineer. Git and Github are 2 completely different and independent things. Weird since you claim you have so much to share with the world that you aren't sharing it in the standard way, but then again, you don't know the diff between git & github, so that explains things.

I happily use code and information hosted by github.So you're insisting that business computing is irrelevant and it has no place on IBM compatibles. What do the projects that you participate in create code for?

Are you talking to me? I'm a lead software engineer at a large well known company. I write code all day and get paid extremely well for it. You live in a remote mountain cabin trolling on forums all day.

The issue is neither your endurance nor your willingness to look the fool. The question is will you ever impress anyone with your inaccurate "facts" and generously sprinkled personal attacks

You're again confusing me with your poor trolling efforts.

BTW, the AKC lists the top 197 breeds and the Basset Hound comes in at #34. Do you (or would you) own a Lab simply because that breed is #1 on the definitive list of top breeds?

I said a BH isn't in the top 25 and you just admitted that was true. Finally we're getting somewhere.

Your brain functions in a rather peculiar way. Yes, way more people buy labs vs. bh's. That's why labs are #1 and bhs are #34. Do you know basic math? 1 > 34 when it comes to ranking.

If you think Java is on the way out, you are even more clueless then most people on the forums think you are. And you obviously aren't a software engineer since every back end job is Java / Spring.

 

[harsh]

Careful readers (not you apparently) would note that nobody ever mentioned 1981 except you. I mentioned 1983. But nice (poor) attempt on manipulating the facts.

1983 was an erroneous claim on your part. The IBM PC was introduced in 1981, not 1983 as your post #49 unequivocally proclaims.

All my comments are well documented on the internet.

Documented perhaps but rarely, if ever, cited in the appropriate context. There is a whole lot of misinformation floating around on the Internet. You've demonstrated your ability (and apparently unbounded willingness) to contribute to the misinformation.

Wrong again, they had dual 360kb floppies.

They could, but they didn't have to (implied by the word "had"). The floppy capacity, as clearly stated under the heading of "Diskette Drive", was 160K and the drive count was "up to" (to use a popular DIRECTV squishy term) two drives. The double-sided drives (as well as support for nine sectors instead of the eight) came later.

Cassette tape? Now you're just making stuff up to just troll. PCs had floppys and later hard drive.

Again, read the official documentation.

You're confusing history with your VIC-20.

I've never had a Vic-20. How can anyone make so many incorrect guesses in a single thread?

16K of RAM?...The XT had 640KB which was plenty to run a C compiler.

The PC XT (model 5160) wasn't the "day one" PC (model 5150). The original 5150 base model had 16K and a tape drive jack. Whether or not many (or even just one person) ordered that configuration is immaterial as you're summarily denying their existence. Here's a run-down of the standard features (from the aforementioned 5150 document -- highlights mine):

-Keyboard for data and text entry
-Cassette player jack for cassette attachment
-Five expansion slots for additional memory anddisplay, printer, communications and game adaptors
-Built-in speaker for musical programming
-Power-on automatic self-test of system components
-BASIC language interpreter, 16K memory

With respect to the IBM PC XT, the base RAM complement was 256K, not 640K. Only the two most expensive configurations came with 640K of RAM. Ram chips sold for around $4.50/Kilobyte back in 1981 so "bulking up" wasn't a no-brainer unless you're 1-2-3 spreadsheet was busting at the seams.

https://jcmit.net/memoryprice.htm

For anyone interested in the facts, here's IBMs take with respect to the IBM PC XT:

AP - IBM Personal Computer XT

www.ibm.com

Git and Github are 2 completely different and independent things.

I use git exclusively to "clone" stuff from github. It meets my cloning needs quite well and is effortlessly scripted (or cut and pasted into a terminal window as is most commonly my case).

I said a BH isn't in the top 25 and you just admitted that was true. Finally we're getting somewhere

Since this is one of the few things you've claimed that was actually true, you should consider it partial restitution for your many false claims. It doesn't change the fact that one shouldn't base their choice of dog breed (or operating system) entirely on what the surveys say. There must be some reason that the other 196 breeds on the list continue to be actively cultivated in addition to the breeds that aren't listed (or have been formally de-listed). From a practical pet standpoint, nobody should categorically dismiss mixed breed dogs either.

 

[SledgeHammer]

1983 was an erroneous claim on your part. The IBM PC was introduced in 1981, not 1983 as your post #49 unequivocally proclaims

It unequivocally proclaims that you lack reading comprehension and are desperately trying to troll. "From day 1 in 1983" doesn't imply the XT came out in 1983, it implies I am speaking of the year 1983. You lose AGAIN. Hilarious.

.Documented perhaps but rarely, if ever, cited in the appropriate context. There is a whole lot of misinformation floating around on the Internet.

As I unequivocally proclaimed above, whether you accept fact or are a "fact denier" is none of my concern. And you have been REPEATEDLY admonished by the mods and 99% of the users for that.

They could, but they didn't have to

That just unequivocally proclaims that you bought a stripped down base model and I didn't. Mine had dual 360kb, full height 5 1/4" floppies and came with IBM C. Or maybe you bought yours in 1981 while I bought mine in 1983 which is the year I've talked about?

The PC XT (model 5160) wasn't the "day one" PC (model 5150). The original 5150 base model had 16K and a tape drive jack.

There you go again living in your own fantasy world and denying reality. I have unequivocally talked from the beginning of the thread of 1983.

Only the two most expensive configurations came with 640K of RAM.

WOW. I got you to admit TWO things in a single thread. You're even bad at trolling. A higher quality troll would unequivocally never admit anything.

Since this is one of the few things you've claimed that was actually true

Now I got you to admit THREE things in a single thread. Now we're getting somewhere.

It doesn't change the fact that one shouldn't base their choice of dog breed (or operating system) entirely on what the surveys say. There must be some reason that the other 196 breeds on the list continue to be actively cultivated in addition to the breeds that aren't listed (or have been formally de-listed). From a practical pet standpoint, nobody should categorically dismiss mixed breed dogs either.

You're a survey and stat denier. That's great. Who cares? While popular things are not GUARANTEED to be the best and the best things are not GUARANTEED to be popular, they are generally highly correlated.

Your OS of choice has a 2% market share, and your dog of choice also has a 2% market share.

My OS of choice has a 77% market share, and my dog of choice has a 45% market share. Both are generally regarded as better then your choices and the stats and market share back that up.

Sounds like my IBM XT was also better then yours since you were an early adopter and bought into the half baked version. Sux 2 b u.

But its facetious of you to unequivocally proclaim that everyone must have bought the same crappy configured machine that you did.

Much like its facetious of you to unequivocally proclaim that you "design" software when you clearly are a home hobbyist that doesn't know what he's doing. Nobody does it the way you do. Parsing dates is a one liner in every modern language. Using Regex for this unequivocally exposes you as an amateur.

Even if you wanted to roll your own date time parser, you still wouldn't do it that way. But doubtful anybody in 2022 would bother rolling their own since its built in to 100% of languages.

 

[harsh]

"From day 1 in 1983" doesn't imply the XT came out in 1983, it implies I am speaking of the year 1983.

If only that is what you had said. Since you can't be bothered to follow links or look back, I'll quote what you said (for a third time):

From day one of the IBM PC in 1983, the main programming language was C.

"day one of the IBM PC" wasn't 1983. The IBM PC that had its "day one" in 1981. One clause your statement is clearly false and all we have is your word on the second. Maybe you can share some evidence of your claim that "the main programming language was C" for DOS in 1983 as you haven't yet bloodied your nose on that. I get the distinct feeling that a lot of FORTRAN, assembly and even Pascal/Turbo Pascal programmers aren't going to agree but if you can find authoritative documentation you might salvage on that.

As I unequivocally proclaimed above, whether you accept fact or are a "fact denier" is none of my concern.

What should concern you is that you crafted a statement that isn't true (for one or possibly more reasons) and no amount of misrepresenting what you said, heaping on insults or trying to campaign for the support of others is going to change that. It doesn't present well to accuse me of being a "denier" when you're denying that you said what you said.

The fact is that the IBM PC XT did indeed debut in 1983 so I'm surprised you're trying to walk that back.