User talk:Guy Harris

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

(Sorry, this welcome is way, way, way overdue. But better now than later)

Welcome!

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using three tildes, like this: ~~~. Four tildes (~~~~) produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome!

Zzyzx11 | Talk 01:35, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Thanks

Thanks for the SNAP explanation! The Provan link is also very helpful! Funkyj 19:18, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Framebuffer

Hi. I've noticed you're rather good with compsci-related articles. If you could please help with the current discussion on the framebuffer article, I'd be very grateful. Thanks! StuartBrady 14:28, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hebrew

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yonah Maybe should be changed also?

Yes. Done. Guy Harris 20:13, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Articles

I have been looking through the list of unwatched pages (available only to administrators) and found 31-bit. I see that you recently edited this but are not watching it. You may want to go to your preferences and under the "editing" tab turn on "Add pages you edit to your watchlist". This will enable you to keep an eye out for any edits that are made to pages you work on and help to revert vandalism. If you do decide to turn it on can you please drop me a note on my talk page so I can cut down my excessive watchlist (6000+). Thanks. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 18:39, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] CPU article and the ABC vandal

Hey Guy, I just wanted to drop a cautionary line warning you to be careful of violating the WP:3RR in reverting the CPU article. You wouldn't want to get yourself blocked over a silly vandal that we all realize is spouting BS. If you're up to your maximum number of reverts for a day, just wait for another editor (like myself) to remove the text. I've listed this guy on WP:VIP, so some vandalism fighters will be watching him (one of his IPs has already been short-term blocked). He'll likely either soon lose interest in the articles here or become persistant enough to be labeled a long-term alert vandal. Thanks for helping maintain the integrity of CPU, just make sure to cover your own posterior in the process! -- uberpenguin 05:19, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] creatorcode/ostype

I just thought I should mention to someone: about the file format info boxes. Creator code and ostype are two different Mac OS concepts. It is not correct to replace one with the other. Vendor independent file types won't have a standard creator code, while the creator code for vendor specific file types exists, but will (so far as I know) never be the same as the ostype. I'd rather not get involved in the project to do these boxes, but I did want to get this to those working on it. I'll only correct the pages I'm watching. Notinasnaid 07:47, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] file colors by type

(→Behaviour - Move the color "ls" example here from the "file (Unix)" page - it has nothing whatsoever to do with the "file" command.)

Guy, the 'ls' command uses the file's type to determine the color. The file command shows the file's type. So it is completely relevent to the file article. I wish you would put it back. --Unixguy 14:00, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] watch the coppyright stuff...

It looks like most of your addition to Vinod Dham's article is taken directly (cut/paste) from the source that you also added. Jabencarsey 22:46, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Err, umm, no, it doesn't look like that at all. What I added was stuff not from the article, replacing some stuff from the article. When looking up some stuff about Dham, I found the article, and put the "Copyright violation?" item in the discussion page. Guy Harris 01:23, 6 July 2006 (UTC)


ok... i think i got you and guy before you confused on the history...NM Jabencarsey 06:10, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] registers

I didn't know that risc compilers ignored it too. So what's the point of the language feature (I used to teach C++ and some people wanted to know) --matador300 23:55, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] PDP-8

I'll let it sit, but the point is that the number of general purpose accumulators is small on the PDP-8 and HP 2100. The 8086 really only has AX and BX, the other registers are usually busy doing particular other things. The Power PC register assignent is pretty much determined by the compiler, as it was on the PDP-11 rather than fixed by the register names, or at least that's my understanding. No register is called SP as it is on the x86, though neither 2100 or PDP-8, or MV/8000 for that matter had formal stack registers at all. If you want to get my POV, I like to point out where old, primitive things often succeed over supposedly more elegant things, as is the case with the x86, or in the more extreme case, pointing out parallels with the even more primitive PDP-8. As I pointed out, its the fixed small number of accumulators that most marks the x86 has having a primitive design philosiphy, every RISC machine has a bunch of rN registers, though every one has failed to replace the x86 on anything bigger than a pocket PC. I'll have another look at the I-32, are you an expert or something? I'm just a PC -> windows programmer. --matador300 00:03, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] X86 architecture cleanup

Thanks for your work on the X86 architecture and following up on my edits. Two heads are better than one! Dealing with the mixture of past and present tense is a challenge. I'm trying to move most wording to the present, but I'm not sure its always the best approach. Keep an eye out for important facts that I may have overlooked and dropped in the processes of streamlining things. Anyway, thanks again. JonHarder 15:56, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Core 2 Duo

Laptop chip Merom is officially out ([1], [2], etc). For some reason the listing for it points to the same page as for Conroe, and that page specifically includes the word "desktop". But it's been officially launched, as per the press release. The pages that indicated as such were correct.

Now actual availability is of course another matter entirely. Aluvus 18:13, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Power Architecture

Glad you could join me! Thanks for the editing, corrections and other stuff! -- Henriok 20:35, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

I'm just shaking things up in older articles. Thanks for following up and correcting things! -- Henriok 18:29, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

You are correct.. PowerPC-AS is used in Power4 and later. I actually state as much in the POWERx section, but why I didn't say so in the section about PowerPC-AS is beyond me. I will correct it. Thanks! -- Henriok 08:08, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Would you mind tanking a peek at User:Henriok/PowerPC 600 for me? I'm suggesting a major overhaul of this section. It's been sorely lacking attention the last copuple of years and I think it'd be a good idea to make a collective article instead of making a lot of small stubs.. It'll be in the same style as the G3, G4 and 970 articles are, and the PowerQUICC stub that will be my next project. Thanks in advance -- Henriok 17:01, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

They do certainly differ technically but they could be grouped together in a historic perspective, just as I've done with the PowerPC 400 family. Since these processors are of yeasteryear, I don't think that the technical similarities or differences are the main thing, but the historical. Even though one might fill long articles with intricate details about either chip, I'm not the one who's prepared to write those articles, and this is the best I can do.. If I don't do something, I'd be surprised if anyone did anything. As it stands now, the separate articles are in a pitiful state. Time is not our friend here, and soon there will be hard to find any information about these processors. And besides that.. they do share the name for some reason. -- Henriok 10:58, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Solaris extended file attributes

I've taken the WP:BOLD guideline to the limit (me changing something Guy Harris wrote about Sun software?) by revising Extended file attributes#Solaris. I hope you're happy with my version; if not, please have another go at the article. Cheers, CWC(talk) 21:44, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Unix creator

Thanks for such a good reply on the talk page - very thorough. I'll continue to monitor, see if we can reach a concensus on how the article should look. --Oscarthecat 20:02, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] List of IBM Products, 701, ... citations

Thanks for the help on these. I'm new, or a slow learner, or both. Adding details to other articles, it seemed that editors would move external links to the "external links" section, where they were out of context and generally usless (unlikly to be found by the reader at the instant the reader was reading the related text. "Cites" were recommended instead. So to add a link pointing to the most basic source, the IBM archive, I used the cite in what you correctly described as a weird way

{{cite web | title = IBM 123 | url= http:ibmarchive....}}

You wrote that these weren't really citations - I'm not sure about that; they would seem to meet the wiki definition "A citation or bibliographic citation is a reference to a book, article, web page, or other published item with sufficient details to uniquely identify the item". After reading your comment, though, and reading about citation formats, it seems that what I should have done is:

IBM 123 {{cite web | title=IBM Archive | url = http:ibmarchive...}}

Question: If I had coded the IBM 701 that way, would you still have thought it necessary to remove it and create the External Links section? (btw, the 701 got that coding because, given a wiki link in "List of IBM...", I couldn't use my weird style there)

In the "List of IBM Products", however, you converted my weird cites to external links - which other editors don't like in the body of an article. My assumption is that, should I continue, I should make similar additions in the style you used.

There are more interesting concerns, however, with the "List of IBM Products"; I made an entry in the article discussion -- which has had no responses thus far. The article's 2nd paragraph, which I added and you improved (thanks again), is not the way to go, Instead of saying what is not there, it should say what is there -- and that might change the name of the article, if nothing else to "A list of some IBM products"!

Listing all IBM products in one list is not viable, there are too many. And listing all software together, even if it could be done, it would not meet readers needs. The list of IBM Products should be broken into multiple lists.

Software should be listed by machine type or series. For example: IBM 650 software is unique to that machine and should be listed as part of that article or an "IBM 650 Software" article. On the other hand, 1401 software, much of it compatible across the 1400 series, can be listed with the series, not with the individual machines.

Machines with 3 digit numbers, such as IBM 407, would make a useful division, essentially "1900-1959". Even though some of those were used with later machines (e.g. the IBM 1401 could use 729 tape drives). Few things in real life being exact, the early "named" calculators would also belong in this list. Even the AN/FSQ7.

Beginning with the 1960s, separate architectures should have their own list. There is no benefit, for example, in mixing the IBM PC and System/360 in the same list.

And non-data processing stuff: Time clocks, coffee grinders, ..., should have their own list, or lists.

thanks again for all the help (and without saying what you might have thought about me!), 69.106.254.246 04:51, 24 September 2006 (UTC)


[edit] List of IBM Products, ... (more)

Just for fun, I listed ALMOST all of the 1400 series software provided by IBM! Check it out, IBM 1400 series#References. 69.106.254.246 20:09, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 1460

The 1460 already there was

  • IBM 1460 — Almost twice as fast as the 1401; 1963

That's in a list of computers.

The 1460 to be added is the 1460 processing unit. Not the same thing at all.

Same problem for the IBM 650 System, its 3 components are

    650 console unit
    655 power supply
    card read punch 533 or 537

The list of IBM Products includes the 650 System, but not the 650 console unit.

Ah, I've been assuming the list should not have entries where the number is duplicated. No reason why we can't duplicate numbers, just need text at the front to let readers know (so that they know to click "find next" sometimes).

But, ..... Looking at newer computer "products" in the List of Products, IBM PC, Thinkpads, e series, there is just one entry; detail component lists, if any, are elsewhere. We should do the same thing for the older computers. Some components would be repeated for different computers, 729s, for example, but that's not a problem.

If anyone thought a list of every component was really important, they could set up templates for Computer system and for computer component, then a bot could assemble the list. (That would have a better result than the current system since only obsessive/compulsive people like myself add components to the current list!)

thanks, 69.106.254.246 14:20, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The 7750 was a communications control unit. Also, move the references section to the end, where it usually appears.)

References not at end - not my first dumb mistake; I forget with wiki that I'm editing only part of a document so not the first time I've added references at the end of a section. Sorry, I'll try to be more careful.

My recollection of the 7750 was that it not a control unit - I think of control units as components of systems - but that it was a stand alone computer in its own right. That's why I left it to be determined. This reference "specialized telecommunications computer, the IBM 7750." is from http://www.multicians.org/thvv/7094.html. THis article "http://www.research.ibm.com/journal/sj/011/ibmsj0101D.pdf#search=%22%22IBM%207750%22%22" refers to it as "7750 Programmed Transmission Control Unit" - so it might be both stand alone and component. Fine.69.106.254.246 21:50, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] http://futureobservatory.dyndns.org/9081.htm

The article "Herman Hollerith" just had a deletion of text where this web site is listed in the "edit summary". Turns out that both the "Herman Hollerith" and the "Thomas J. Watson" articles have lots of text from that web site. Looking at "Home" for that site, it seems likely that the material there has been published in "A DANCE THROUGH THE FIRES OF TIME". And, last, there are several edits of the "Herman Hollerith" site made by futureobservatory.

btw: After seeing the Hollerith deletion and reading the futureobservatory site, I only happened to go to the Watson site - I wasn't searching for copied text. So there may be more sites with futureobservatory text.

Wikipedia ok with all this? tooold 06:01, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] System or IBM System ?

Looking at the "IBM hardware" category, most article titles begin "IBM", but not all. In the case of "System", it would seem that IBM consistently prefixes "IBM", see [3]. Posssibly within the community of IBM users we drop the "IBM" as unnecessary, but in the larger community of Wikipedia it might be best to be consistent, always using the "IBM" prefix. Want to rename the "System" articles to "IBM System"? (Would also be reasonable if all the hardware articles began "IBM")

There are a lot of articles with "System" in their name; consistent use of "IBM" would help both those looking for IBM articles and those not. tooold 08:34, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Contents Box

Some articles (my guess is older ones) are missing Content boxes. Is there a way to fix this? Luis F. Gonzalez 19:30, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Disk sharing

Hi!

Thanks for your improvements to the "shared resource"/"Shared file access"/"Disk sharing" article that I created! Strange that this has not existed before. (I have addressed the redirect problems you mentioned on my discussion page. THanks for point it out.)

[edit] DoD model or TCP/IP reference model

I teach TCP/IP networking, and in the books we use the four or five layer TCP/IP reference model is called the TCP/IP model. Especially outside U.S., calling it the "DoD model" would not be appreciated. The TCP/IP model is redirected to the Internet protocol suite article.

/Magnus, Sweden

[edit] Pcap

Hi! I did not realize that Ethereal had been renamed Wireshark when I edited the article. I merged both entries in Pcap#Some programs that use libpcap/WinPcap into one line. --J Morgan(talk) 22:12, 1 November 2006 (UTC)


[edit] NetBEUI

See, THIS is why I love Wikipedia :-) I knew the concept (sort of), I just didn't get the wording right. Thanks for the edit man. Good stuff.
PFloyd 22:06, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Article in need of cleanup - please assist if you can

The article AMD K10, to which you have helped contribute, has been flagged as requiring cleanup.

If possible, we would appreciate your assistance in cleaning up this article to bring it up to Wikipedia's quality standards. If you are unsure what the nature of the problem is, please discuss this on the article's talk page.
If you do not want to receive bot-generated messages on your talk page, please consider using the nobots template on your user talk page

[edit] hahaha

I got a good laugh out of this, thanks bro! :D -/- Warren 20:55, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Sorry

I'm sorry for whatever I did to make you upset on that iPhone page. This is the comment I left on that page and I guess it acts as my apology and goodbye to Wikipedia:

I read the article about all those acronyms and everything and the whole WP:BITEing thing but I don't get what it is you guys are talking about. I'm not trolling, as far as I can tell. These are just some honest points of contention I wanted to bring up and now I feel like an idiot. My friend does a lot of Wikipedia stuff and said the community was really great and a nice place to learn and get to know people. I guess I don't see what she was talking about. I really wanted to help with this article because computers are really neat and I think having a phone-computer is a really good idea. I even have a friend with the older iPhone model and thought I could use some personal experience to build the best page we could. I'm still new and learning the ropes, or at least I was. I'm sorry for whatever I did. Cynthia18 11:01, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../g/u/y/User_talk%7EGuy_Harris_82a6.html"