🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <5017aceb-0d73-4a3c...@googlegroups.com>,
 <hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote:
>In 1967, Smith Corona ran an ad in LIFE magazine for an electric
>adding machine (add, subtract, multiply) that would "breeze 
>through your trying tax problems with super-accurate speed."
>
>The price was $90 in 1967 dollars.
>
>What is ironic is that I believe one can get a tax software
>package today for less than that, and the software will not
>only add up the taxes, but also figure them out.  

Where the tax software usually falls down is in the super-accurate
department.

-- 
Regards,
John Levine, jo...@iecc.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies",
Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. https://jl.ly

On 4/14/2018 2:29 PM, hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
> In 1967, Smith Corona ran an ad in LIFE magazine for an electric
> adding machine (add, subtract, multiply) that would "breeze
> through your trying tax problems with super-accurate speed."
> 
> The price was $90 in 1967 dollars.
> 
> What is ironic is that I believe one can get a tax software
> package today for less than that, and the software will not
> only add up the taxes, but also figure them out.
> 

Yes, but...  even with the tax software, there is still the cost of the 
computer...


-- 
numerist at aquaporin4 dot com

On Sun, 15 Apr 2018 20:25:10 -0500, Charles Richmond
<nume...@aquaporin4.com> wrote:

>On 4/14/2018 2:29 PM, hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>> In 1967, Smith Corona ran an ad in LIFE magazine for an electric
>> adding machine (add, subtract, multiply) that would "breeze
>> through your trying tax problems with super-accurate speed."
>> 
>> The price was $90 in 1967 dollars.
>> 
>> What is ironic is that I believe one can get a tax software
>> package today for less than that, and the software will not
>> only add up the taxes, but also figure them out.
>> 
>
>Yes, but...  even with the tax software, there is still the cost of the 
>computer...

Use a web site and the library's computer.

However just about everybody has a computer today for purposes
unrelated to tax computation.

On 4/15/2018 9:33 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
> On Sun, 15 Apr 2018 20:25:10 -0500, Charles Richmond
> <nume...@aquaporin4.com> wrote:
> 
>> On 4/14/2018 2:29 PM, hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>>> In 1967, Smith Corona ran an ad in LIFE magazine for an electric
>>> adding machine (add, subtract, multiply) that would "breeze
>>> through your trying tax problems with super-accurate speed."
>>>
>>> The price was $90 in 1967 dollars.
>>>
>>> What is ironic is that I believe one can get a tax software
>>> package today for less than that, and the software will not
>>> only add up the taxes, but also figure them out.
>>>
>>
>> Yes, but...  even with the tax software, there is still the cost of the
>> computer...
> 
> Use a web site and the library's computer.
> 
> However just about everybody has a computer today for purposes
> unrelated to tax computation.
> 

Bu tto be *completely* fair...  some cost must be added for the 
computer.  I'm *not* sure who would feel safe... doing your taxes on a 
library computer.

And the "adding machine" can be used for other things... balancing your 
checkbook comes to mind.  Working on monthly bills is another...

-- 
numerist at aquaporin4 dot com

On Monday, April 16, 2018 at 12:35:41 PM UTC-4, Charles Richmond wrote:

> > Use a web site and the library's computer.
> > 
> > However just about everybody has a computer today for purposes
> > unrelated to tax computation.
> > 
> 
> Bu tto be *completely* fair...  some cost must be added for the 
> computer.  I'm *not* sure who would feel safe... doing your taxes on a 
> library computer.

Depending on the library, it might have more thorough data
protection than your home computer would, especially if you're
a lay user and not really familiar with data security/privacy
needs of today.



> And the "adding machine" can be used for other things... balancing your 
> checkbook comes to mind.  Working on monthly bills is another...

On Sunday, April 15, 2018 at 9:24:47 PM UTC-4, Charles Richmond wrote:

> > The price was $90 in 1967 dollars.
> > What is ironic is that I believe one can get a tax software
> > package today for less than that, and the software will not
> > only add up the taxes, but also figure them out.

> Yes, but...  even with the tax software, there is still the cost of the 
> computer...

Someone said the $90 in 1967 was roughly $600 today.  That is
roughly what a computer costs today.

And while an adding machine would find multiple uses around
the house, especially for balancing one's checkbook and a few
other household chores (and sometimes for kids' homework*),
a computer would also have plenty of uses around the home, 
such as email and word processing.  If someone is a collector,
the computer can be used to index the items within a collection,
allowing sorting by different keywords (e.g. date, description,
origin, etc.)

On 4/16/2018 1:38 PM, hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
> On Monday, April 16, 2018 at 12:35:41 PM UTC-4, Charles Richmond wrote:
> 
>>> Use a web site and the library's computer.
>>>
>>> However just about everybody has a computer today for purposes
>>> unrelated to tax computation.
>>>
>>
>> Bu tto be *completely* fair...  some cost must be added for the
>> computer.  I'm *not* sure who would feel safe... doing your taxes on a
>> library computer.
> 
> Depending on the library, it might have more thorough data
> protection than your home computer would, especially if you're
> a lay user and not really familiar with data security/privacy
> needs of today.
> 

Why Me. Hancock!  You don't agree with me!!!  What a shock!!!


-- 
numerist at aquaporin4 dot com

On 4/16/2018 1:42 PM, hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
> On Sunday, April 15, 2018 at 9:24:47 PM UTC-4, Charles Richmond wrote:
> 
>>> The price was $90 in 1967 dollars.
>>> What is ironic is that I believe one can get a tax software
>>> package today for less than that, and the software will not
>>> only add up the taxes, but also figure them out.
> 
>> Yes, but...  even with the tax software, there is still the cost of the
>> computer...
> 
> Someone said the $90 in 1967 was roughly $600 today.  That is
> roughly what a computer costs today.
> 
> And while an adding machine would find multiple uses around
> the house, especially for balancing one's checkbook and a few
> other household chores (and sometimes for kids' homework*),
> a computer would also have plenty of uses around the home,
> such as email and word processing. 

But note that email probably incurs a monthly charge for Inet access. 
Maybe that can be rolled into the cost of your phone (which will 
probably be far higher than it was in 1967). Or the cost of cable TV 
(which will certainly be far higher than in 1967). I'll acknowledge 
that these days, the various softwares can be found for free (whether 
PD, free, open source, or pirated). For the WP, don't forget to add in 
the cost of a printer (though if the number of clogged ink cartridges 
I've seen is any indication, it's rarely used).

  If someone is a collector,
> the computer can be used to index the items within a collection,
> allowing sorting by different keywords (e.g. date, description,
> origin, etc.)
> 
 From the day's of the first HP(?) "home computer" long before PCs 
appeared, this has been one of the suggested uses. And I'm sure it 
would work fine for that. But in over 3 decades of providing support, 
I've yet to see anyone actually do it (for long, anyhow).

Now, I'm not arguing against the computer. I've got a bunch of them, 
and some are in daily use. While somewhere I have an adding machine, 
I'm not sure that it still works (I do know the Selectric stopped 
working).

On Mon, 16 Apr 2018 11:36:03 -0500, Charles Richmond
<nume...@aquaporin4.com> wrote:

>On 4/15/2018 9:33 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
>> On Sun, 15 Apr 2018 20:25:10 -0500, Charles Richmond
>> <nume...@aquaporin4.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> On 4/14/2018 2:29 PM, hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>>>> In 1967, Smith Corona ran an ad in LIFE magazine for an electric
>>>> adding machine (add, subtract, multiply) that would "breeze
>>>> through your trying tax problems with super-accurate speed."
>>>>
>>>> The price was $90 in 1967 dollars.
>>>>
>>>> What is ironic is that I believe one can get a tax software
>>>> package today for less than that, and the software will not
>>>> only add up the taxes, but also figure them out.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Yes, but...  even with the tax software, there is still the cost of the
>>> computer...
>> 
>> Use a web site and the library's computer.
>> 
>> However just about everybody has a computer today for purposes
>> unrelated to tax computation.
>> 
>
>Bu tto be *completely* fair...  some cost must be added for the 
>computer.  I'm *not* sure who would feel safe... doing your taxes on a 
>library computer.

Why would you not feel safe?  Don't know about your library but ours
wipes the machines every time a user logs off.

>And the "adding machine" can be used for other things... balancing your 
>checkbook comes to mind.  Working on monthly bills is another...

So can the computer, or for that matter a phone, and you can do your
taxes using the phone as well.

On Mon, 16 Apr 2018 20:18:49 -0500, Dave Garland
<dave.g...@wizinfo.com> wrote:

>On 4/16/2018 1:42 PM, hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>> On Sunday, April 15, 2018 at 9:24:47 PM UTC-4, Charles Richmond wrote:
>> 
>>>> The price was $90 in 1967 dollars.
>>>> What is ironic is that I believe one can get a tax software
>>>> package today for less than that, and the software will not
>>>> only add up the taxes, but also figure them out.
>> 
>>> Yes, but...  even with the tax software, there is still the cost of the
>>> computer...
>> 
>> Someone said the $90 in 1967 was roughly $600 today.  That is
>> roughly what a computer costs today.
>> 
>> And while an adding machine would find multiple uses around
>> the house, especially for balancing one's checkbook and a few
>> other household chores (and sometimes for kids' homework*),
>> a computer would also have plenty of uses around the home,
>> such as email and word processing. 
>
>But note that email probably incurs a monthly charge for Inet access. 
>Maybe that can be rolled into the cost of your phone (which will 
>probably be far higher than it was in 1967). Or the cost of cable TV 
>(which will certainly be far higher than in 1967). I'll acknowledge 
>that these days, the various softwares can be found for free (whether 
>PD, free, open source, or pirated). For the WP, don't forget to add in 
>the cost of a printer (though if the number of clogged ink cartridges 
>I've seen is any indication, it's rarely used).

Why do you need a printer?  You aren't using the US Postal Service at
some ungodly price a pop to deliver letters that could be better
delivered by email are you?

As for phone being more expensive, that depends on how much you use
it.  I pay about 8 dollars a month for cell service plus 10 bucks a
gigabyte, which takes me a while to work through.

>  If someone is a collector,
>> the computer can be used to index the items within a collection,
>> allowing sorting by different keywords (e.g. date, description,
>> origin, etc.)
>> 
> From the day's of the first HP(?) "home computer" long before PCs 
>appeared, this has been one of the suggested uses. And I'm sure it 
>would work fine for that. But in over 3 decades of providing support, 
>I've yet to see anyone actually do it (for long, anyhow).
>
>Now, I'm not arguing against the computer. I've got a bunch of them, 
>and some are in daily use. While somewhere I have an adding machine, 
>I'm not sure that it still works (I do know the Selectric stopped 
>working).

I don't have an "adding machine" but I do have two calculators (I'm
taking a series of exams in which one is allowed one of two specific
models of calculator, no phone, computer, or other devices).


>

On 2018-04-16, Charles Richmond <nume...@aquaporin4.com> wrote:

> On 4/15/2018 9:33 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 15 Apr 2018 20:25:10 -0500, Charles Richmond
>> <nume...@aquaporin4.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> On 4/14/2018 2:29 PM, hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>>>
>>>> In 1967, Smith Corona ran an ad in LIFE magazine for an electric
>>>> adding machine (add, subtract, multiply) that would "breeze
>>>> through your trying tax problems with super-accurate speed."
>>>>
>>>> The price was $90 in 1967 dollars.
>>>>
>>>> What is ironic is that I believe one can get a tax software
>>>> package today for less than that, and the software will not
>>>> only add up the taxes, but also figure them out.
>>>
>>> Yes, but...  even with the tax software, there is still the cost of the
>>> computer...
>> 
>> Use a web site and the library's computer.
>> 
>> However just about everybody has a computer today for purposes
>> unrelated to tax computation.
>
> Bu tto be *completely* fair...  some cost must be added for the 
> computer.  I'm *not* sure who would feel safe... doing your taxes on a 
> library computer.

The same ones who feel safe uploading their personal data to Facebook...

-- 
/~\  cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid (Charlie Gibbs)
\ /  I'm really at ac.dekanfrus if you read it the right way.
 X   Top-posted messages will probably be ignored.  See RFC1855.
/ \  HTML will DEFINITELY be ignored.  Join the ASCII ribbon campaign!

On 17 Apr 2018 03:12:09 GMT, Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid>
wrote:

>On 2018-04-16, Charles Richmond <nume...@aquaporin4.com> wrote:
>
>> On 4/15/2018 9:33 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, 15 Apr 2018 20:25:10 -0500, Charles Richmond
>>> <nume...@aquaporin4.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> On 4/14/2018 2:29 PM, hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> In 1967, Smith Corona ran an ad in LIFE magazine for an electric
>>>>> adding machine (add, subtract, multiply) that would "breeze
>>>>> through your trying tax problems with super-accurate speed."
>>>>>
>>>>> The price was $90 in 1967 dollars.
>>>>>
>>>>> What is ironic is that I believe one can get a tax software
>>>>> package today for less than that, and the software will not
>>>>> only add up the taxes, but also figure them out.
>>>>
>>>> Yes, but...  even with the tax software, there is still the cost of the
>>>> computer...
>>> 
>>> Use a web site and the library's computer.
>>> 
>>> However just about everybody has a computer today for purposes
>>> unrelated to tax computation.
>>
>> Bu tto be *completely* fair...  some cost must be added for the 
>> computer.  I'm *not* sure who would feel safe... doing your taxes on a 
>> library computer.
>
>The same ones who feel safe uploading their personal data to Facebook...

They're uploading their personal data to the government..  I'm not
sure why you think doing it on a machine that is operated by the
government will be less safe than doing it on a machine that they own.

On 4/16/2018 8:50 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
> On Mon, 16 Apr 2018 20:18:49 -0500, Dave Garland
> <dave.g...@wizinfo.com> wrote:
> 

>> Now, I'm not arguing against the computer. I've got a bunch of them,
>> and some are in daily use. While somewhere I have an adding machine,
>> I'm not sure that it still works (I do know the Selectric stopped
>> working).
> 
> I don't have an "adding machine" but I do have two calculators (I'm
> taking a series of exams in which one is allowed one of two specific
> models of calculator, no phone, computer, or other devices).
> 

I'd always lusted after one of those (I'm from the slide rule 
generation), but by the time they became reasonably priced I really 
didn't have much need anymore. Nevertheless, when scientific 
calculators appeared at Dollar Tree (!) I bought one for a buck. 
Cheaply made of course, but many functions. I have never used it. My 
other is a 20+ year old TI-85 Z80 graphing calc that I bought at the 
local thrift store for a couple of bucks. I've never devoted the time 
to figure that one out, other than to poke at the BASIC. But I rarely 
need anything more sophisticated than basic trig.

On Tue, 17 Apr 2018 00:24:38 -0500
Dave Garland <dave.g...@wizinfo.com> wrote:

> I'd always lusted after one of those (I'm from the slide rule 
> generation), but by the time they became reasonably priced I really 

	I'm from the transition generation, I started with slide rules and
still have my ten inch duplex, but calculators did their big price drop
while I was going through school. IIRC it was in the fourth form that
calculators became permitted in the daily slide rule drills (by that time
quite lengthy series of calculations to be performed in races - 3 digit
accurate result required).

	We learned that calculators were slower than slide rules and prone
to strange large errors while slide rules were prone to small errors and
easily spotted order of magnitude errors ... within a year we were all using
calculators.

	I still don't understand this, I conclude that we weren't
particularly rational at fourteen or so.

	Much more recently tutoring a friend through leaving cert maths I
found she reached for a calculator whenever arithmetic was called for, even
dividing by two, multiplying by ten ... and never thought to do any mental
arithmetic.

	I broke her of the habit by doing most of the sums in my head (at
least roughly) while she was still pushing buttons and pointing out the
frequent errors. By the end I had her doing simple ones in her head and
always doing rough sanity checks in her head for the complex ones - her
error rate plummeted.

-- 
Steve O'Hara-Smith                          |   Directable Mirror Arrays
C:\>WIN                                     | A better way to focus the sun
The computer obeys and wins.                |    licences available see
You lose and Bill collects.                 |    http://www.sohara.org/

On Tue, 2018-04-17, J  Clarke wrote:
> On 17 Apr 2018 03:12:09 GMT, Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid>
> wrote:
>
>>On 2018-04-16, Charles Richmond <nume...@aquaporin4.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 4/15/2018 9:33 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Sun, 15 Apr 2018 20:25:10 -0500, Charles Richmond
...
>>>>> Yes, but...  even with the tax software, there is still the cost of the
>>>>> computer...
>>>> 
>>>> Use a web site and the library's computer.
>>>> 
>>>> However just about everybody has a computer today for purposes
>>>> unrelated to tax computation.
>>>
>>> Bu tto be *completely* fair...  some cost must be added for the 
>>> computer.  I'm *not* sure who would feel safe... doing your taxes on a 
>>> library computer.
>>
>>The same ones who feel safe uploading their personal data to Facebook...
>
> They're uploading their personal data to the government..  I'm not
> sure why you think doing it on a machine that is operated by the
> government will be less safe than doing it on a machine that they own.

Around here, computers in public libraries are[0] infamous for
being badly-managed Windows machines full of trojans.

/Jorgen

[0] Or were.  Perhaps they have gotten a clue in recent years and
    started to give you a clean virtual machine every time, but I
    wouldn't count on it.

-- 
  // Jorgen Grahn <grahn@  Oo  o.   .     .
\X/     snipabacken.se>   O  o   .

On Tue, 2018-04-17, Dave Garland wrote:
> On 4/16/2018 1:42 PM, hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>> On Sunday, April 15, 2018 at 9:24:47 PM UTC-4, Charles Richmond wrote:
...
>   If someone is a collector,
>> the computer can be used to index the items within a collection,
>> allowing sorting by different keywords (e.g. date, description,
>> origin, etc.)
>> 
>  From the day's of the first HP(?) "home computer" long before PCs 
> appeared, this has been one of the suggested uses. And I'm sure it 
> would work fine for that. But in over 3 decades of providing support, 

The cookie recipe database was a famous use case, but as far as I can
tell it was dragged up as an attempt to justify a computer, not
something someone actually *created*.  Justifying a home computer was
really hard before the internet.

> I've yet to see anyone actually do it (for long, anyhow).

I keep some of that.  Bird observations, for example.
But that's because:

- All serious birdwatchers keep track, and always have.
  The data should survive longer than yourself.
  
- I'm too picky to use the online national database, being
  a Unix programmer and all.  If I write something down, it
  has to be text files under version control, fitting my own
  requirements.

/Jorgen

-- 
  // Jorgen Grahn <grahn@  Oo  o.   .     .
\X/     snipabacken.se>   O  o   .

Jorgen Grahn <grahn...@snipabacken.se> wrote:
> On Tue, 2018-04-17, Dave Garland wrote:
>> On 4/16/2018 1:42 PM, hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>>> On Sunday, April 15, 2018 at 9:24:47 PM UTC-4, Charles Richmond wrote:
> ...
>> If someone is a collector,
>>> the computer can be used to index the items within a collection,
>>> allowing sorting by different keywords (e.g. date, description,
>>> origin, etc.)
>>> 
>> From the day's of the first HP(?) "home computer" long before PCs 
>> appeared, this has been one of the suggested uses. And I'm sure it 
>> would work fine for that. But in over 3 decades of providing support, 
> 
> The cookie recipe database was a famous use case, but as far as I can
> tell it was dragged up as an attempt to justify a computer, not
> something someone actually *created*.  Justifying a home computer was
> really hard before the internet.
> 
>> I've yet to see anyone actually do it (for long, anyhow).
> 
> I keep some of that.  Bird observations, for example.
> But that's because:
> 
> - All serious birdwatchers keep track, and always have.
>   The data should survive longer than yourself.
>   
> - I'm too picky to use the online national database, being
>   a Unix programmer and all.  If I write something down, it
>   has to be text files under version control, fitting my own
>   requirements.
> 

Indexing record collections seemed to be a popular thing, especially as
there was a fairly large intersection between audiophiles and computer
hackers in the early days. Likewise ham radio operators.

-- 
Pete

On 2018-04-17, Jorgen Grahn <grahn...@snipabacken.se> wrote:

> On Tue, 2018-04-17, Dave Garland wrote:
>
>> On 4/16/2018 1:42 PM, hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>>
>>> On Sunday, April 15, 2018 at 9:24:47 PM UTC-4, Charles Richmond wrote:
> ...
>>   If someone is a collector,
>>> the computer can be used to index the items within a collection,
>>> allowing sorting by different keywords (e.g. date, description,
>>> origin, etc.)
>> 
>>  From the day's of the first HP(?) "home computer" long before PCs 
>> appeared, this has been one of the suggested uses. And I'm sure it 
>> would work fine for that. But in over 3 decades of providing support, 
>
> The cookie recipe database was a famous use case, but as far as I can
> tell it was dragged up as an attempt to justify a computer, not
> something someone actually *created*.  Justifying a home computer was
> really hard before the internet.

Not for people like us.  We really wanted a computer, and got one
as soon as we could.

>> I've yet to see anyone actually do it (for long, anyhow).
>
> I keep some of that.  Bird observations, for example.
> But that's because:
>
> - All serious birdwatchers keep track, and always have.
>   The data should survive longer than yourself.
>   
> - I'm too picky to use the online national database, being
>   a Unix programmer and all.  If I write something down, it
>   has to be text files under version control, fitting my own
>   requirements.

Ditto for our marine life logs.

-- 
/~\  cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid (Charlie Gibbs)
\ /  I'm really at ac.dekanfrus if you read it the right way.
 X   Top-posted messages will probably be ignored.  See RFC1855.
/ \  Fight low-contrast text in web pages!  http://contrastrebellion.com

On Monday, April 16, 2018 at 9:50:26 PM UTC-4, J. Clarke wrote:


> Why do you need a printer?  You aren't using the US Postal Service at
> some ungodly price a pop to deliver letters that could be better
> delivered by email are you?

There are some communications still best handled by a traditional 
mailed letter.  Admittedly, I very rarely need a printer these
days, but sometimes it is still necessary.

Just the other day I wanted to pay a bill over the phone, but
the company wanted a $5 service charge to do so.  So I mailed
them a check.  Some companies charge a fee for electronic
payments.

In the event of a serious dispute with a business, it is very
helpful to correspond by Certified Mail.  This keeps a written
record of your conversations, and the fact the recipient must
sign for your letter encourages them to take it more seriously.

[snip]

On Tuesday, April 17, 2018 at 9:26:25 AM UTC-4, Peter Flass wrote:

> Indexing record collections seemed to be a popular thing, especially as
> there was a fairly large intersection between audiophiles and computer
> hackers in the early days. Likewise ham radio operators.

I did that, except it was with my cassette tape collection.

Unfortunately, I've learned that cassettes, as well as cassette
players, do not last forever and I must make other arrangements.

I considered buying one of those devices that burns a CD from
a record or tape, but I decided against it.  First, the cost of
such a device would cover downloading fresh copies of many songs.
Secondly, I'd be copying from worn out records or cassettes and
end up with a crappy copy.  Third, over time my tastes in music
has changed, and some songs I once liked have lost their attraction.

On Tue, 17 Apr 2018 19:44:23 GMT, hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:

> On Tuesday, April 17, 2018 at 9:26:25 AM UTC-4, Peter Flass wrote:
> 
>> Indexing record collections seemed to be a popular thing, especially 
as
>> there was a fairly large intersection between audiophiles and computer
>> hackers in the early days. Likewise ham radio operators.
> 
> I did that, except it was with my cassette tape collection.
> 
> Unfortunately, I've learned that cassettes, as well as cassette
> players, do not last forever and I must make other arrangements.
> 
> I considered buying one of those devices that burns a CD from
> a record or tape, but I decided against it.  First, the cost of
> such a device would cover downloading fresh copies of many songs.
> Secondly, I'd be copying from worn out records or cassettes and
> end up with a crappy copy.  Third, over time my tastes in music
> has changed, and some songs I once liked have lost their attraction.
> 
> 
> 
> 

Maybe punk is dead, at last.
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0350002/

-- 
Bah, and indeed, Humbug.

<hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote:
> On Tuesday, April 17, 2018 at 9:26:25 AM UTC-4, Peter Flass wrote:
> 
>> Indexing record collections seemed to be a popular thing, especially as
>> there was a fairly large intersection between audiophiles and computer
>> hackers in the early days. Likewise ham radio operators.
> 
> I did that, except it was with my cassette tape collection.
> 
> Unfortunately, I've learned that cassettes, as well as cassette
> players, do not last forever and I must make other arrangements.
> 
> I considered buying one of those devices that burns a CD from
> a record or tape, but I decided against it.  First, the cost of
> such a device would cover downloading fresh copies of many songs.
> Secondly, I'd be copying from worn out records or cassettes and
> end up with a crappy copy.  Third, over time my tastes in music
> has changed, and some songs I once liked have lost their attraction.
> 

Years ago I copied a bunch of LPs to cassette so I could listen at work,
and that worked out okay. I never bothered to make the jump to CD, since
services like  Pandora and Google are free. I _did_ inherit a gadget that
allows copying  VHS tapes to a computer (maybe as Mpeg?), but I have yet to
try it. I've dumped all of my off-the-air recordings and most of the
commercial stuff, but I have a few tapes with personal stuff on them that
I'd like to copy.

-- 
Pete

On 4/17/2018 4:52 PM, Peter Flass wrote:

> Years ago I copied a bunch of LPs to cassette so I could listen at work,
> and that worked out okay. I never bothered to make the jump to CD, since
> services like  Pandora and Google are free. I _did_ inherit a gadget that
> allows copying  VHS tapes to a computer (maybe as Mpeg?), but I have yet to
> try it. I've dumped all of my off-the-air recordings and most of the
> commercial stuff, but I have a few tapes with personal stuff on them that
> I'd like to copy.
> 
I've got one of those VHS-USB things. Got it from a friend who'd 
bought it and couldn't figure out how to work it. Burned a copy of her 
OTA Three Stooges tapes (and a family reunion) to DVD for her, using a 
$4 thrift store VHS player. I'll probably never use any of it again. 
But if the need arises, I'm ready.

Once I had to get a bunch of disks converted from one format to 
another. The source format was something wierd that I couldn't handle 
myself. Got it done from a local subcontractor. Went to his office, 
which turned out to be the former garage of a ranch house, and though 
it was filled with elderly and dusty gear thought "this looks like a 
mechanic's shop". Then he came in, wearing one of those pinstriped 
shirts with a name badge that you see auto mechanics wearing. Turned 
out his other gig was as a tow truck driver.

On Tue, 2018-04-17, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
> On 2018-04-17, Jorgen Grahn <grahn...@snipabacken.se> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 2018-04-17, Dave Garland wrote:
>>
>>> On 4/16/2018 1:42 PM, hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Sunday, April 15, 2018 at 9:24:47 PM UTC-4, Charles Richmond wrote:
>> ...
>>>   If someone is a collector,
>>>> the computer can be used to index the items within a collection,
>>>> allowing sorting by different keywords (e.g. date, description,
>>>> origin, etc.)
>>> 
>>>  From the day's of the first HP(?) "home computer" long before PCs 
>>> appeared, this has been one of the suggested uses. And I'm sure it 
>>> would work fine for that. But in over 3 decades of providing support, 
>>
>> The cookie recipe database was a famous use case, but as far as I can
>> tell it was dragged up as an attempt to justify a computer, not
>> something someone actually *created*.  Justifying a home computer was
>> really hard before the internet.
>
> Not for people like us.  We really wanted a computer, and got one
> as soon as we could.

Of course, but I meant "justifying" as in "stating a rational
reason" ;-)

/Jorgen

-- 
  // Jorgen Grahn <grahn@  Oo  o.   .     .
\X/     snipabacken.se>   O  o   .

On 17 Apr 2018 11:23:26 GMT
Jorgen Grahn <grahn...@snipabacken.se> wrote:

> Justifying a home computer was really hard before the internet.

	Indeed, during the brief period I was running an ISP (1994/5) I got
a phone call from one person who had read our advert and wanted advice on
what sort of computer to buy to best access the internet since they'd had
no reason to own one before.

-- 
Steve O'Hara-Smith                          |   Directable Mirror Arrays
C:\>WIN                                     | A better way to focus the sun
The computer obeys and wins.                |    licences available see
You lose and Bill collects.                 |    http://www.sohara.org/

On 18/04/2018 12:37, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
> On 17 Apr 2018 11:23:26 GMT
> Jorgen Grahn <grahn...@snipabacken.se> wrote:
> 
>> Justifying a home computer was really hard before the internet.
> 
> 	Indeed, during the brief period I was running an ISP (1994/5) I got
> a phone call from one person who had read our advert and wanted advice on
> what sort of computer to buy to best access the internet since they'd had
> no reason to own one before.
> 

I disagree with those sentiments; a computer is such an exciting complex
machine that it is a joy to have it just for its own sake.

Computers are there to be appreciated for their own sake
and not to be  put to any application  :-)

On Wed, 18 Apr 2018 13:28:31 +0100
Gareth's Downstairs Computer
<headstone255.but.n...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> On 18/04/2018 12:37, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
> > On 17 Apr 2018 11:23:26 GMT
> > Jorgen Grahn <grahn...@snipabacken.se> wrote:
> > 
> >> Justifying a home computer was really hard before the internet.
> > 
> > 	Indeed, during the brief period I was running an ISP (1994/5) I
> > got a phone call from one person who had read our advert and wanted
> > advice on what sort of computer to buy to best access the internet
> > since they'd had no reason to own one before.
> > 
> 
> I disagree with those sentiments; a computer is such an exciting complex
> machine that it is a joy to have it just for its own sake.

	To you, me (and probably everyone in this froup) that is so, but to
her and many others a computer is just a tool.

-- 
Steve O'Hara-Smith                          |   Directable Mirror Arrays
C:\>WIN                                     | A better way to focus the sun
The computer obeys and wins.                |    licences available see
You lose and Bill collects.                 |    http://www.sohara.org/

On Tue, 2018-04-17, hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
> On Tuesday, April 17, 2018 at 9:26:25 AM UTC-4, Peter Flass wrote:
>
>> Indexing record collections seemed to be a popular thing, especially as
>> there was a fairly large intersection between audiophiles and computer
>> hackers in the early days. Likewise ham radio operators.
>
> I did that, except it was with my cassette tape collection.
>
> Unfortunately, I've learned that cassettes, as well as cassette
> players, do not last forever and I must make other arrangements.

Hm, I should consider salvaging mine ... at least that cassette by
local punk band Abstrakt; it's great, but it's never going to be
available through Spotify.

> I considered buying one of those devices that burns a CD from
> a record or tape, but I decided against it.  First, the cost of
> such a device would cover downloading fresh copies of many songs.
> Secondly, I'd be copying from worn out records or cassettes and
> end up with a crappy copy.  Third, over time my tastes in music
> has changed, and some songs I once liked have lost their attraction.

How did they change? I think after fifteen (1985) mine have just
extended a bit.  I once feared I'd start enjoying jazz or classical
music music when I grew up, but that has fortunately not happened yet.

/Jorgen

-- 
  // Jorgen Grahn <grahn@  Oo  o.   .     .
\X/     snipabacken.se>   O  o   .

Jorgen Grahn <grahn...@snipabacken.se> writes:
>On Tue, 2018-04-17, hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>> On Tuesday, April 17, 2018 at 9:26:25 AM UTC-4, Peter Flass wrote:
>>
>>> Indexing record collections seemed to be a popular thing, especially as
>>> there was a fairly large intersection between audiophiles and computer
>>> hackers in the early days. Likewise ham radio operators.
>>
>> I did that, except it was with my cassette tape collection.
>>
>> Unfortunately, I've learned that cassettes, as well as cassette
>> players, do not last forever and I must make other arrangements.
>
>Hm, I should consider salvaging mine ... at least that cassette by
>local punk band Abstrakt; it's great, but it's never going to be
>available through Spotify.
>
>> I considered buying one of those devices that burns a CD from
>> a record or tape, but I decided against it.  First, the cost of
>> such a device would cover downloading fresh copies of many songs.
>> Secondly, I'd be copying from worn out records or cassettes and
>> end up with a crappy copy.  Third, over time my tastes in music
>> has changed, and some songs I once liked have lost their attraction.
>
>How did they change? I think after fifteen (1985) mine have just
>extended a bit.  I once feared I'd start enjoying jazz or classical
>music music when I grew up, but that has fortunately not happened yet.

Mine have widened over time, as a child of the 60's/70's, hard
rock is the preferred genre, but I started going to the playboy
jazz festival at the hollywood bowl in 1984 (and went every year
thereafter until 2010) which exposed me to a much wider range
of good music (live Miles Davis, Dave Brubeck, Sarah Vaughn,
Joe Williams, Chick Corea (and later RTF), Larry Carlton, George Benson,
Etta James, Ozomatli, Celia Cruz, Spyro Gyra, YellowJackets,
Duke Ellington, Herbie Hancock, Stanley Jorden, Maynard Ferguson,
and four hundred others (over 25 years of festivals)).   For the
last couple of years live folk, bluegrass, and yes, opera have
entered the mix.   Live music rules and doesn't always work
as recorded music (e.g. can't listen to Opera on the stereo, but
really enjoy the live performance).

On 2018-04-18, Ahem A Rivet's Shot <ste...@eircom.net> wrote:

> On Wed, 18 Apr 2018 13:28:31 +0100
> Gareth's Downstairs Computer
> <headstone255.but.n...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> On 18/04/2018 12:37, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>>
>>> On 17 Apr 2018 11:23:26 GMT
>>> Jorgen Grahn <grahn...@snipabacken.se> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Justifying a home computer was really hard before the internet.
>>> 
>>> 	Indeed, during the brief period I was running an ISP (1994/5) I
>>> got a phone call from one person who had read our advert and wanted
>>> advice on what sort of computer to buy to best access the internet
>>> since they'd had no reason to own one before.
>> 
>> I disagree with those sentiments; a computer is such an exciting complex
>> machine that it is a joy to have it just for its own sake.
>
> 	To you, me (and probably everyone in this froup) that is so, but to
> her and many others a computer is just a tool.

Given today's designs, now it's more of a ball and chain combined with
an electronic ankle bracelet.  Or, as Orwell put it, a telescreen.

-- 
/~\  cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid (Charlie Gibbs)
\ /  I'm really at ac.dekanfrus if you read it the right way.
 X   Top-posted messages will probably be ignored.  See RFC1855.
/ \  Fight low-contrast text in web pages!  http://contrastrebellion.com

On 2018-04-18, Jorgen Grahn <grahn...@snipabacken.se> wrote:

> On Tue, 2018-04-17, hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>
>> I considered buying one of those devices that burns a CD from
>> a record or tape, but I decided against it.  First, the cost of
>> such a device would cover downloading fresh copies of many songs.
>> Secondly, I'd be copying from worn out records or cassettes and
>> end up with a crappy copy.  Third, over time my tastes in music
>> has changed, and some songs I once liked have lost their attraction.
>
> How did they change? I think after fifteen (1985) mine have just
> extended a bit.  I once feared I'd start enjoying jazz or classical
> music music when I grew up, but that has fortunately not happened yet.

I always knew that it was just a matter of time before I got into
classical music.  That happened in the late '80s, when I decided
I didn't like where pop was going.  Now I play viola in a community
orchestra.

The other genre I've gotten into is bluegrass.  No jazz yet.
And no rap/hip-hop ever, I hope.

-- 
/~\  cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid (Charlie Gibbs)
\ /  I'm really at ac.dekanfrus if you read it the right way.
 X   Top-posted messages will probably be ignored.  See RFC1855.
/ \  Fight low-contrast text in web pages!  http://contrastrebellion.com

On 2018-04-18, Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
> On 2018-04-18, Jorgen Grahn <grahn...@snipabacken.se> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 2018-04-17, hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>>
>>> I considered buying one of those devices that burns a CD from
>>> a record or tape, but I decided against it.  First, the cost of
>>> such a device would cover downloading fresh copies of many songs.
>>> Secondly, I'd be copying from worn out records or cassettes and
>>> end up with a crappy copy.  Third, over time my tastes in music
>>> has changed, and some songs I once liked have lost their attraction.
>>
>> How did they change? I think after fifteen (1985) mine have just
>> extended a bit.  I once feared I'd start enjoying jazz or classical
>> music music when I grew up, but that has fortunately not happened yet.
>
> I always knew that it was just a matter of time before I got into
> classical music.  That happened in the late '80s, when I decided
> I didn't like where pop was going.  Now I play viola in a community
> orchestra.
>
> The other genre I've gotten into is bluegrass.  No jazz yet.
> And no rap/hip-hop ever, I hope

Whne I was growing up, there was no electriciy in country parts of this
country. Recently I have really discovered bluegrass. which is very like
traditional Irish music, as above, even with some like the Irish
'sean-nos' type. Yes, Bach is still good, in a cold sort of way.
>


-- 
greymaus.ireland.ie
Just_Another_Grumpy_Old_Man

On Thu, 2018-04-19, ma...@mail.com wrote:
> On 2018-04-18, Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
>> On 2018-04-18, Jorgen Grahn <grahn...@snipabacken.se> wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, 2018-04-17, hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>>>
>>>> I considered buying one of those devices that burns a CD from
>>>> a record or tape, but I decided against it.  First, the cost of
>>>> such a device would cover downloading fresh copies of many songs.
>>>> Secondly, I'd be copying from worn out records or cassettes and
>>>> end up with a crappy copy.  Third, over time my tastes in music
>>>> has changed, and some songs I once liked have lost their attraction.
>>>
>>> How did they change? I think after fifteen (1985) mine have just
>>> extended a bit.  I once feared I'd start enjoying jazz or classical
>>> music music when I grew up, but that has fortunately not happened yet.
>>
>> I always knew that it was just a matter of time before I got into
>> classical music.  That happened in the late '80s, when I decided
>> I didn't like where pop was going.  Now I play viola in a community
>> orchestra.
>>
>> The other genre I've gotten into is bluegrass.  No jazz yet.
>> And no rap/hip-hop ever, I hope

I think rap without gold chains and self-glorification exists and can
be really good, but I haven't really investigated.  Sturgeon's Law
applies, I guess.

> Whne I was growing up, there was no electriciy in country parts of this
> country. Recently I have really discovered bluegrass. which is very like

The third person to mention bluegrass ... There may be a bluegrass
trend; there's even one newly started band in my home town, and
they're great live.

> traditional Irish music, as above, even with some like the Irish
> 'sean-nos' type. Yes, Bach is still good, in a cold sort of way.

Now that you mention it, I don't think I'll ever enjoy music which
I percieve as cold.

/Jorgen

-- 
  // Jorgen Grahn <grahn@  Oo  o.   .     .
\X/     snipabacken.se>   O  o   .

<ma...@mail.com> wrote:
> On 2018-04-18, Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
>> On 2018-04-18, Jorgen Grahn <grahn...@snipabacken.se> wrote:
>> 
>>> On Tue, 2018-04-17, hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>>> 
>>>> I considered buying one of those devices that burns a CD from
>>>> a record or tape, but I decided against it.  First, the cost of
>>>> such a device would cover downloading fresh copies of many songs.
>>>> Secondly, I'd be copying from worn out records or cassettes and
>>>> end up with a crappy copy.  Third, over time my tastes in music
>>>> has changed, and some songs I once liked have lost their attraction.
>>> 
>>> How did they change? I think after fifteen (1985) mine have just
>>> extended a bit.  I once feared I'd start enjoying jazz or classical
>>> music music when I grew up, but that has fortunately not happened yet.
>> 
>> I always knew that it was just a matter of time before I got into
>> classical music.  That happened in the late '80s, when I decided
>> I didn't like where pop was going.  Now I play viola in a community
>> orchestra.
>> 
>> The other genre I've gotten into is bluegrass.  No jazz yet.
>> And no rap/hip-hop ever, I hope
> 
> Whne I was growing up, there was no electriciy in country parts of this
> country. Recently I have really discovered bluegrass. which is very like
> traditional Irish music, as above, even with some like the Irish
> 'sean-nos' type. 

As it should be, since it was originated in the US by the "Scotch-Irish"
who moved from Ulster to Appalachia. I college a fraternity brother was
into bluegrass, and would tune into WWVA evenings.  I like old-fashioned
"country and western" music, which you don't get much of any more. What
they call "country" now is too similar to pop.

Yes, Bach is still good, in a cold sort of way.

I always liked classical, although I got into Bach later. I like just about
anything except the tuneless, non-musical stuff that seems to be popular
these days.



-- 
Pete

On 2018-04-19, Jorgen Grahn <grahn...@snipabacken.se> wrote:

> On Thu, 2018-04-19, ma...@mail.com wrote:
>
>> On 2018-04-18, Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> I always knew that it was just a matter of time before I got into
>>> classical music.  That happened in the late '80s, when I decided
>>> I didn't like where pop was going.  Now I play viola in a community
>>> orchestra.
>>>
>>> The other genre I've gotten into is bluegrass.  No jazz yet.
>>> And no rap/hip-hop ever, I hope
>
> I think rap without gold chains and self-glorification exists and can
> be really good, but I haven't really investigated.  Sturgeon's Law
> applies, I guess.

Probably.  But can rap exist without self-glorification?
Inquiring minds want to know.  Or not...

>> Whne I was growing up, there was no electriciy in country parts of this
>> country. Recently I have really discovered bluegrass. which is very like
>
> The third person to mention bluegrass ... There may be a bluegrass
> trend; there's even one newly started band in my home town, and
> they're great live.

I attend regular jam sessions, and am in an informal group that's
getting good enough for open mic sessions (if I could talk the
others into going...).

>> traditional Irish music, as above, even with some like the Irish
>> 'sean-nos' type. Yes, Bach is still good, in a cold sort of way.
>
> Now that you mention it, I don't think I'll ever enjoy music which
> I percieve as cold.

True.  I used to think of Mozart - as well as baroque music -
as cold.  But I've heard some good performances that bring it
to life.  Seeing Tafelmusik perform The Galileo Project live
was a delight.  Playing baroque music is fun too, because you
see it from the inside.  There's a lot to see.

-- 
/~\  cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid (Charlie Gibbs)
\ /  I'm really at ac.dekanfrus if you read it the right way.
 X   Top-posted messages will probably be ignored.  See RFC1855.
/ \  Fight low-contrast text in web pages!  http://contrastrebellion.com

On Wednesday, April 18, 2018 at 10:01:44 AM UTC-4, Jorgen Grahn wrote:

> > I considered buying one of those devices that burns a CD from
> > a record or tape, but I decided against it.  First, the cost of
> > such a device would cover downloading fresh copies of many songs.
> > Secondly, I'd be copying from worn out records or cassettes and
> > end up with a crappy copy.  Third, over time my tastes in music
> > has changed, and some songs I once liked have lost their attraction.
> 
> How did they change? I think after fifteen (1985) mine have just
> extended a bit.  I once feared I'd start enjoying jazz or classical
> music music when I grew up, but that has fortunately not happened yet.

Just that some old songs and groups I once liked a lot lost
their interest.

As I've aged, I think I like a softer sound.

On Wednesday, April 18, 2018 at 3:53:21 PM UTC-4, Charlie Gibbs wrote:

> Given today's designs, now it's more of a ball and chain combined with
> an electronic ankle bracelet.  Or, as Orwell put it, a telescreen.

It is frightening how much of "1984" has come to pass:

--Our employers monitor us very close through CCTV, monitoring of
telephone calls, tracking whereabouts with GPS, and monitoring 
of computer use.  In essence, your boss is watching at all times.

--Some employers extend monitoring to outside the office.  Proctor
& Gamble got into trouble for checking _home_ phone records of
their employees, but I suspect they could get away with it now.

--Many places has TV screens in the waiting room or dining room.

--Since health care often comes through an employer, the
employer is closing monitoring your health situation.

On Thu, 19 Apr 2018 17:07:53 -0700 (PDT), hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:

>On Wednesday, April 18, 2018 at 10:01:44 AM UTC-4, Jorgen Grahn wrote:
>
>> > I considered buying one of those devices that burns a CD from
>> > a record or tape, but I decided against it.  First, the cost of
>> > such a device would cover downloading fresh copies of many songs.
>> > Secondly, I'd be copying from worn out records or cassettes and
>> > end up with a crappy copy.  Third, over time my tastes in music
>> > has changed, and some songs I once liked have lost their attraction.
>> 
>> How did they change? I think after fifteen (1985) mine have just
>> extended a bit.  I once feared I'd start enjoying jazz or classical
>> music music when I grew up, but that has fortunately not happened yet.
>
>Just that some old songs and groups I once liked a lot lost
>their interest.
>
>As I've aged, I think I like a softer sound.

I still go on youtube to listen to Janis Joplin, Grace Slick, and Jimi
Hendrix. Along with a number of others.

On 4/19/2018 6:39 PM, Peter Flass wrote:
> <ma...@mail.com> wrote:
>> On 2018-04-18, Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
>>> On 2018-04-18, Jorgen Grahn <grahn...@snipabacken.se> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Tue, 2018-04-17, hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I considered buying one of those devices that burns a CD from
>>>>> a record or tape, but I decided against it.  First, the cost of
>>>>> such a device would cover downloading fresh copies of many songs.
>>>>> Secondly, I'd be copying from worn out records or cassettes and
>>>>> end up with a crappy copy.  Third, over time my tastes in music
>>>>> has changed, and some songs I once liked have lost their attraction.
>>>>
>>>> How did they change? I think after fifteen (1985) mine have just
>>>> extended a bit.  I once feared I'd start enjoying jazz or classical
>>>> music music when I grew up, but that has fortunately not happened yet.
>>>
>>> I always knew that it was just a matter of time before I got into
>>> classical music.  That happened in the late '80s, when I decided
>>> I didn't like where pop was going.  Now I play viola in a community
>>> orchestra.
>>>
>>> The other genre I've gotten into is bluegrass.  No jazz yet.
>>> And no rap/hip-hop ever, I hope
>>
>> Whne I was growing up, there was no electriciy in country parts of this
>> country. Recently I have really discovered bluegrass. which is very like
>> traditional Irish music, as above, even with some like the Irish
>> 'sean-nos' type.
> 
> As it should be, since it was originated in the US by the "Scotch-Irish"
> who moved from Ulster to Appalachia. I college a fraternity brother was
> into bluegrass, and would tune into WWVA evenings.  I like old-fashioned
> "country and western" music, which you don't get much of any more. What
> they call "country" now is too similar to pop.
> 
> Yes, Bach is still good, in a cold sort of way.
> 
> I always liked classical, although I got into Bach later. I like just about
> anything except the tuneless, non-musical stuff that seems to be popular
> these days.
> 

You guys would enjoy Mozart's piano sonatas and Chopin's piano 
masterpieces.


-- 
numerist at aquaporin4 dot com

On 2018-04-20, Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
> On 2018-04-19, Jorgen Grahn <grahn...@snipabacken.se> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 2018-04-19, ma...@mail.com wrote:
>>
>>> On 2018-04-18, Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>> Now that you mention it, I don't think I'll ever enjoy music which
>> I percieve as cold.
>
> True.  I used to think of Mozart - as well as baroque music -
> as cold.

I think that listening to Mozart is like watching syrup dripping from
a spoon, It seems so .. Easy. Bach is so sophisticated, as well as
the somewhat cold feeling. it can be fascinating to feel how..
Complicated and yet easy he made the whole ot sound. I read somewhere
that, at that time, composer just wrote the 'skeleton' of the work,
and performers were expected to fill it out as the played, slight
variations as was portrayed in 'Amadeus'

  But I've heard some good performances that bring it
> to life.  Seeing Tafelmusik perform The Galileo Project live
> was a delight.  Playing baroque music is fun too, because you
> see it from the inside.  There's a lot to see.
>

Probably more fun playing, as one can experience and see the
ornamentions (sp?)



-- 
greymaus.ireland.ie
Just_Another_Grumpy_Old_Man

On 2018-04-20, Charles Richmond <nume...@aquaporin4.com> wrote:
> On 4/19/2018 6:39 PM, Peter Flass wrote:
>> <ma...@mail.com> wrote:
>>> On 2018-04-18, Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
>> 
>
> You guys would enjoy Mozart's piano sonatas and Chopin's piano 
> masterpieces.
>
>


They are givens. I read somewhere that Chopin made an actual
livlihood from teaching music, and was pretty savage about it.

-- 
greymaus.ireland.ie
Just_Another_Grumpy_Old_Man

On 2018-04-20, JimP <solo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 19 Apr 2018 17:07:53 -0700 (PDT), hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>
>>On Wednesday, April 18, 2018 at 10:01:44 AM UTC-4, Jorgen Grahn wrote:
>>
>>> > I considered buying one of those devices that burns a CD from
>>> > a record or tape, but I decided against it.  First, the cost of
>>> > such a device would cover downloading fresh copies of many songs.
>>> > Secondly, I'd be copying from worn out records or cassettes and
>>> > end up with a crappy copy.  Third, over time my tastes in music
>>> > has changed, and some songs I once liked have lost their attraction.
>>> 
>>> How did they change? I think after fifteen (1985) mine have just
>>> extended a bit.  I once feared I'd start enjoying jazz or classical
>>> music music when I grew up, but that has fortunately not happened yet.
>>
>>Just that some old songs and groups I once liked a lot lost
>>their interest.
>>
>>As I've aged, I think I like a softer sound.
>
> I still go on youtube to listen to Janis Joplin, Grace Slick, and Jimi
> Hendrix. Along with a number of others.

Janis and Jimi were brilliant people with bad finishes. Pity. Amy
Winehouse recently.


-- 
greymaus.ireland.ie
Just_Another_Grumpy_Old_Man

On 4/20/2018 3:48 AM, ma...@mail.com wrote:
> On 2018-04-20, Charles Richmond <nume...@aquaporin4.com> wrote:
>> On 4/19/2018 6:39 PM, Peter Flass wrote:
>>> <ma...@mail.com> wrote:
>>>> On 2018-04-18, Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>
>> You guys would enjoy Mozart's piano sonatas and Chopin's piano
>> masterpieces.
>>
>>
> 
> 
> They are givens. I read somewhere that Chopin made an actual
> livlihood from teaching music, and was pretty savage about it.
> 

Like Adres Segovia on classical guitar (who gave selected master classes 
sometimes), high quality musicians can be exacting and demanding teachers.

-- 
numerist at aquaporin4 dot com

On 4/18/2018 7:33 AM, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
> On Wed, 18 Apr 2018 13:28:31 +0100
> Gareth's Downstairs Computer
> <headstone255.but.n...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> 
>> On 18/04/2018 12:37, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>>> On 17 Apr 2018 11:23:26 GMT
>>> Jorgen Grahn <grahn...@snipabacken.se> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Justifying a home computer was really hard before the internet.
>>>
>>> 	Indeed, during the brief period I was running an ISP (1994/5) I
>>> got a phone call from one person who had read our advert and wanted
>>> advice on what sort of computer to buy to best access the internet
>>> since they'd had no reason to own one before.
>>>
>>
>> I disagree with those sentiments; a computer is such an exciting complex
>> machine that it is a joy to have it just for its own sake.
> 
> 	To you, me (and probably everyone in this froup) that is so, but to
> her and many others a computer is just a tool.
> 

Probably speaking for most everyone on <a.f.c.>, we don't think of 
computers as appliances.  Computers have a special place in our hearts 
and our lives!

"One person with passion is better than forty people merely interested." 
           ...-- E. M. Forster

-- 
numerist at aquaporin4 dot com

On 4/17/2018 12:24 AM, Dave Garland wrote:
>
 >       [snip...]          [snip...]          [snip...]
> 
> I'd always lusted after one of those (I'm from the slide rule 
> generation), but by the time they became reasonably priced I really 
> didn't have much need anymore. Nevertheless, when scientific calculators 
> appeared at Dollar Tree (!) I bought one for a buck. Cheaply made of 
> course, but many functions. I have never used it. My other is a 20+ year 
> old TI-85 Z80 graphing calc that I bought at the local thrift store for 
> a couple of bucks. I've never devoted the time to figure that one out, 
> other than to poke at the BASIC. But I rarely need anything more 
> sophisticated than basic trig.

To lean to fully use your TI-85 calculator, you'd need a college 
course!!!  ISTM you can download games for the TI-85!  Its amazing what 
some have done with their TI-85's.......

-- 
numerist at aquaporin4 dot com

Charles Richmond <nume...@aquaporin4.com> wrote:
> On 4/20/2018 3:48 AM, ma...@mail.com wrote:
>> On 2018-04-20, Charles Richmond <nume...@aquaporin4.com> wrote:
>>> On 4/19/2018 6:39 PM, Peter Flass wrote:
>>>> <ma...@mail.com> wrote:
>>>>> On 2018-04-18, Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> You guys would enjoy Mozart's piano sonatas and Chopin's piano
>>> masterpieces.
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> They are givens. I read somewhere that Chopin made an actual
>> livlihood from teaching music, and was pretty savage about it.
>> 
> 
> Like Adres Segovia on classical guitar (who gave selected master classes 
> sometimes), high quality musicians can be exacting and demanding teachers.
> 

If you're hiring Segovla you're probably paying more than a few dollars a
lesson. Presumably only someone who was pretty good to start with would pay
that, and they'd really like to play up to his level. You're not going yo
hire him to give lessons to your kid.

-- 
Pete

On 4/20/2018 10:20 AM, Peter Flass wrote:
> Charles Richmond <nume...@aquaporin4.com> wrote:
>> On 4/20/2018 3:48 AM, ma...@mail.com wrote:
>>> On 2018-04-20, Charles Richmond <nume...@aquaporin4.com> wrote:
>>>> On 4/19/2018 6:39 PM, Peter Flass wrote:
>>>>> <ma...@mail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On 2018-04-18, Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> You guys would enjoy Mozart's piano sonatas and Chopin's piano
>>>> masterpieces.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> They are givens. I read somewhere that Chopin made an actual
>>> livlihood from teaching music, and was pretty savage about it.
>>>
>>
>> Like Adres Segovia on classical guitar (who gave selected master classes
>> sometimes), high quality musicians can be exacting and demanding teachers.
>>
> 
> If you're hiring Segovla you're probably paying more than a few dollars a
> lesson. Presumably only someone who was pretty good to start with would pay
> that, and they'd really like to play up to his level. You're not going yo
> hire him to give lessons to your kid.
> 

ISTM that Segovia's master classes were given to students Segovia 
chose...  at *no* cost to the students.

-- 
numerist at aquaporin4 dot com

On Fri, 20 Apr 2018 00:53:06 GMT, JimP <solo...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Thu, 19 Apr 2018 17:07:53 -0700 (PDT), hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
> 
[]
>>Just that some old songs and groups I once liked a lot lost
>>their interest.
>>
>>As I've aged, I think I like a softer sound.
> 
> I still go on youtube to listen to Janis Joplin, Grace Slick, and Jimi
> Hendrix. Along with a number of others.

Seems a lot of songs I liked are being used by advertisers these days.


-- 
Bah, and indeed, Humbug.

On Fri, 20 Apr 2018 17:06:54 GMT, Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid>
wrote: 

> On 2018-04-20, Charles Richmond <nume...@aquaporin4.com> wrote:
>> On 4/18/2018 7:33 AM, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>>> On Wed, 18 Apr 2018 13:28:31 +0100
>>> Gareth's Downstairs Computer
>>> <headstone255.but.n...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> On 18/04/2018 12:37, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>>>>> On 17 Apr 2018 11:23:26 GMT
>>>>> Jorgen Grahn <grahn...@snipabacken.se> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Justifying a home computer was really hard before the internet.
>>>>>
>>>>>      Indeed, during the brief period I was running an ISP (1994/5)
>>>>>      I 
>>>>> got a phone call from one person who had read our advert and
>>>>> wanted advice on what sort of computer to buy to best access the
>>>>> internet since they'd had no reason to own one before.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I disagree with those sentiments; a computer is such an exciting
>>>> complex machine that it is a joy to have it just for its own sake.
>>> 
>>>      To you, me (and probably everyone in this froup) that is so,
>>>      but to 
>>> her and many others a computer is just a tool.
>>> 
>>
>> Probably speaking for most everyone on <a.f.c.>, we don't think of 
>> computers as appliances.  Computers have a special place in our
>> hearts and our lives!
> 
> *applause* [vigorous nodding]
> 

Maybe; but we're just 1 generation on from steam train enthusiasts.
(I'm now writing a forth for DOS)

-- 
Bah, and indeed, Humbug.

On 21/04/2018 21:18, Kerr-Mudd,John wrote:
> 
> Maybe; but we're just 1 generation on from steam train enthusiasts.
> (I'm now writing a forth for DOS)
> 

Recommend the book "Writing threaded Interpreted Languages"
by Loeliger. Read this about 35 years ago and recently
got a copy via Amazon.

Been reading up on the 64 bit ARMv8 with a view to the same thing.