Need to discuss payware disaster recovery in this NG

[Bob S]

Are you confusing me with John Fitzsimons?


I meant that remark only in the sens of "IMHO" and as a "my two cents
worth" only. Nothing in it was intended to imply that I think I moderate
this group.


More likely what they meant was that a person should be more inclined to
only use freeware that's listed at a reputable site like Snapfiles, Nonags
or this group's Pricelessware page.

--
Regards from John Corliss
I don't reply to trolls and other such idiots. No adware, cdware,
commercial software, crippleware, demoware, nagware, PROmotionware,
shareware, spyware, time-limited software, trialware, viruses or warez
please.

John,

The quote was from a post you made that I found in the archives when
searching to see if there was a charter - which there is none. It was
mentioned in the thread that the FAQ was written by "John", no last name
given as I recall so it may be the other person you named as being the
originator of the FAQ. My apologizes if I'm mistaken.

The sites listed above as freeware sites are known to be reputable and I've
downloaded files from all of them. I believe only 1 (nonags) of these 3,
state on their sites that the files have been checked for viruses but as for
functionality of the program - we're on our own. Just because it's on their
site does not mean it runs correctly on all systems nor that it's been
thoroughly tested for any particular hardware configuration. I'll bet if I
looked hard enough, most freeware distribution sites have the disclaimers
about the software just as the authors do - essentially saying, "Use at your
own risk"

I would agree, that the perception that since it's posted there, it must be
good - but that is no guarantee. Remember when ZDNet used to allow free
access to their software and there was a counter of the number of downloads
for the software and reviews were posted? At least with that you had some
idea how popular a program was and what was thought about it. Is there
anything like that available for freeware today that we can believe?

This is the forum to discuss these matters "relating to freeware" and all
that entails. What some may object to may be exactly what I and others are
looking for and no, it won't necessarily be found in other forums - been
there, done that. I would encourage dialog here that warned of problems
about a particular program but also advise that the negatives and positives
are opinions of a particular configuration and user and may not be valid for
others. When someone asks about a particular program or class of program in
this forum, there is often many detailed comments that are extremely
beneficial - both pro and con and there are often comparisons made between
programs that are shareware, commercial, and just about any other
description - and that is good. It provides a broader view and someone may
find that the $100 program they're considering has an equivalent in freeware
or shareware. That is valuable information and in such a widely read ng
such as this, those meaningful discussions go a long way in educating a lot
of potential users.

Telling people that their post doesn't meet your particular criteria is
doing a disservice. Not to mention the fact that there is no official
criteria for what can and cannot be posted here - no matter what anyone
thinks. This is not a moderated group, no charter and it's Usenet..... what
could be better...;-) The spam and truly OT posts sometimes out number
posts relating to freeware. You don't and can't stop those - so why
chastise those that have valid comments to contribute? We're here to learn
and to offer advise to others when we can.

Remember this item:

Amendment 1.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or
prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech,
or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to
petition the government for a redress of grievances.

In the absence of any charter or other reasonable and enforceable
restrictions to limit discussion here, I'd say it wins out - and it is
enforceable - even on Usenet.

Bob S.

 

[Susan Bugher]

This is the forum to discuss these matters "relating to freeware" and all
that entails.

Telling people that their post doesn't meet your particular criteria is
doing a disservice. Not to mention the fact that there is no official
criteria for what can and cannot be posted here - no matter what anyone
thinks. This is not a moderated group, no charter and it's Usenet..... what
could be better...;-)

<SNIP>

Yup. This is an unmoderated group and anyone may post anything they
please - including posts that say other posts are off-topic - and posts
that say the posts were not off-topic. . . etc. etc. ad infinitum. . .


FWIW - there is a BROAD consensus regarding posts - the "relating to
freeware" topics people want to discuss in ACF and the topics they DON'T
want to discuss. See:

http://www.pricelesswarehome.org/acf/Posting.php

IMO voluntary adherence to that broad consensus shows consideration for
others.

My 2 cents worth on this. . .

Susan
--
Posted to alt.comp.freeware
Search alt.comp.freeware (or read it online):
http://www.google.com/advanced_group_search?q=+group:alt.comp.freeware
Pricelessware & ACF: http://www.pricelesswarehome.org
Pricelessware: http://www.pricelessware.org (not maintained)

 

[Bob S]

Yup. This is an unmoderated group and anyone may post anything they
please - including posts that say other posts are off-topic - and posts
that say the posts were not off-topic. . . etc. etc. ad infinitum. . .


FWIW - there is a BROAD consensus regarding posts - the "relating to
freeware" topics people want to discuss in ACF and the topics they DON'T
want to discuss. See:

http://www.pricelesswarehome.org/acf/Posting.php

IMO voluntary adherence to that broad consensus shows consideration for
others.

My 2 cents worth on this. . .

Susan

Susan,

Concerning one of the topics - Commercial software, it was voted on (total
of 36 votes) and this answer got the most of the meager votes:

d) off-topic - brief mention sometimes okay (for comparison etc.)

If you read my comments - that is exactly my point as well as the OP's - for
comparison etc. So why does it bother anyone - it's what the few voted on?

Now - how many people do you think read this newsgroup and how many actually
post here? Do you really believe that a total of 36 votes is a consensus?
That isn't even a pimple compared to the number of readers this group has.
When you have hundreds or thousands of responses, then you can say there's a
general consensus but not 36 votes - that's ridiculous.

In summary then there is nothing against what the OP or I said in the FAQ's
or your poll. I think some people only read what they want to and like
throwing out pissy comments just to be heard. Grow up children and look at
the bigger picture.....

Bob S.

 

[=?ISO-8859-1?Q?=BBQ=AB?=]

If you read my comments - that is exactly my point as well as the
OP's - for comparison etc. So why does it bother anyone - it's
what the few voted on?

No, the OP has decided that there are no freeware solutions to suit his
disk imaging needs, and so he thinks it's a good idea to open up a
discussion about payware solutions.

 

[Bob S]

No, the OP has decided that there are no freeware solutions to suit his
disk imaging needs, and so he thinks it's a good idea to open up a
discussion about payware solutions.

I'm not trying to be argumentative but if you read his first paragraphs - I
think you'll find his post is about freeware and unless Metronome is
commercial software, I see no reference to payware. Are you perhaps
referring to an earlier post?

I'll repost his comments here just in case they're not available to
everyone:
.........................................
"Every one of us may need to resort to payware recovery utilities in
order to rescue our computers from damage caused by badly- or
irresponsibly-crafted freeware. God knows what will happen when we click
on a file named "install.exe." I've already had this experience.
Freeware coders don't exactly provide us with professional documentation
(if at all!), and we can't depend on calling them to bail us out. Most
of these crafters are not software engineers, and they have not been
trained in engineering discipline. If their code has screwed up our
system, chances are pretty good that they have no idea why.

Because of my response about this in another thread, one of the
participants requested that I address this issue in a new thread. Here
it is. I was jogged because one of our regular participants just told
someone that his issue was "off topic." The subject, however, dealt with
recovery software that was only available as payware. Let's get real.

When I recently tested metronome programs, I found in two cases that the
software caused my computer to crash. In one case, the
wonderfully-glitzy program installed an obscure Borland authoring suite
into an obscure directory, and made numererous arcane registry entries
under three different root names, one of which was a word the coder had
invented with a high school chum about something else.

*** None of this was documented or even mentioned. ***

Borland had long abandoned this authoring product, and had removed all
references and support on their web site. I had to sleuth all of this
out for myself. The programmer didn't answer emails. Even though I used
an install tracking program, my registry was still a mess. Yes: this
could be you!

Installing new freeware isn't as risky as dining on blowfish, but it can
damage your installation so badly that without technical expertise, your
only option may be to reformat your hard disk and install everything
again (taking days of work).

So, for me a discussion of any product that can be used to fix a system
that got busted by freeware is on-topic for us, even if it's commercial.
This is especially true when, as in the case of image restore products,
there's no freeware solution. In fact, these discussions should be
essential, constant topics on this board, because the damage is done by
(on-topic) freeware. The need to keep heads-up far outweighs any and all
theoretical purity.

Richard"
..........................................................

Bob S.

 

[=?ISO-8859-1?Q?=BBQ=AB?=]

I'm not trying to be argumentative but if you read his first
paragraphs - I think you'll find his post is about freeware and
unless Metronome is commercial software, I see no reference to
payware. Are you perhaps referring to an earlier post?

I'm referring to the OP in this thread, the one you quoted in full.

I'll repost his comments here just in case they're not available
to everyone:

I'll snip to get to the part I wsa talking about.

So, for me a discussion of any product that can be used to fix a
system that got busted by freeware is on-topic for us, even if
it's commercial. This is especially true when, as in the case of
image restore products, there's no freeware solution.

Here he's /not/ advocating a comparison discussion as you said above.
Just he feels he needs some payware and thinks it should be on-topic
here.

One can also fill up a HDD drive with freeware, but that doesn't make
the freeware group a good place to ask about what brand of HDD to
purchase when an extra one is needed.

 

[jacaranda]

Yeah, I know: payware is "off topic" here. Sometimes fiercely.
But let's face it:

At least have the courtesy to mark your thread OT.

And since you've decided to go against the "spirit" of a freeware group,
don't expect people to be so eager to help you in the future.

 

[John Fitzsimons]

Not to start another argument but it was your FAQ posting I found (Item #3)
that I quoted above. How can you now argue "relating to freeware" is not
on-topic. Perhaps you need to look again at the OP's post and think about
what he said. Comparisons of payware/freeware are valid topics as well as
how to restore a corrupt install that has been damaged by freeware.
..................................................
3 ) WHAT IS THE PURPOSE OF THE ALT.COMP.FREEWARE NEWSGROUP ?
To discuss matters relating to computer freeware.

< snip >

If one is talking about a commercial program to fix a freeware problem
then one is not discussing "computer freeware". The discussion is
relating to the use of a commercial program.

The fact that the commercial program might be used on freeware is
irrelevant.

Using your suggestion one could discuss payware application launchers
because they launch freeware. Er.....no.

Regards, John.

--
****************************************************
,-._|\ (A.C.F FAQ) http://clients.net2000.com.au/~johnf/faq.html
/ Oz \ John Fitzsimons - Melbourne, Australia.
\_,--.x/ http://www.vicnet.net.au/~johnf/welcome.htm
v http://clients.net2000.com.au/~johnf/

 

[John Fitzsimons]

news:[email protected]...

Telling people that their post doesn't meet your particular criteria is
doing a disservice.

Telling people that this newsgroup is for discussion of freeware is
doing people a service. They may not have noticed that their post was
going to a freeware newsgroup.

Not to mention the fact that there is no official
criteria for what can and cannot be posted here - no matter what anyone
thinks. This is not a moderated group, no charter and it's Usenet..... what
could be better...;-) The spam and truly OT posts sometimes out number
posts relating to freeware. You don't and can't stop those - so why
chastise those that have valid comments to contribute? We're here to learn
and to offer advise to others when we can.

< snip >

Most of us are here to discuss "freeware". It seems like you are here
to talk about whatever you like. Your choice. Others have the choice
to criticise you if they care to.

Regards, John.

--
****************************************************
,-._|\ (A.C.F FAQ) http://clients.net2000.com.au/~johnf/faq.html
/ Oz \ John Fitzsimons - Melbourne, Australia.
\_,--.x/ http://www.vicnet.net.au/~johnf/welcome.htm
v http://clients.net2000.com.au/~johnf/

 

[Margrave of Brandenburg]

Most of us are here to discuss "freeware". It seems like you are here
to talk about whatever you like. Your choice. Others have the choice
to criticise you if they care to.

Regards, John.

That's KING John, right?

 

[Bob S]

Telling people that this newsgroup is for discussion of freeware is
doing people a service. They may not have noticed that their post was
going to a freeware newsgroup.


< snip >

Most of us are here to discuss "freeware". It seems like you are here
to talk about whatever you like. Your choice. Others have the choice
to criticise you if they care to.

Regards, John.

--
****************************************************
,-._|\ (A.C.F FAQ) http://clients.net2000.com.au/~johnf/faq.html
/ Oz \ John Fitzsimons - Melbourne, Australia.
\_,--.x/ http://www.vicnet.net.au/~johnf/welcome.htm
v http://clients.net2000.com.au/~johnf/

John,

No I'm not here to discuss anything I want and if you'll open your eyes as
well as your mind you may see a few things you overlooked. I marked my
response OT, and I damn well have been discussing freeware and so did the OP
and if you don't like what is being said - that's your privilege and right
but you have NO right to tell me or anyone else what can and cannot be said.
There's an old saying about "I may not agree with what you say but I'll
fight to the death your right to say it". Close enough even if I didn't get
it exactly correct.

I served in the armed forces for 20 years defending that right and no one is
going to restrict what I have to say. I've kept everything I've said in the
spirit of this newsgroup and any one that see's it differently can certainly
kill-file me or simply not read the post. I do not need your help or help
from anyone else here that has such a narrow-ass mind about what can and
cannot be discussed. Get a life.

Bob S.

 

[John Corliss]

Yeah, I've read the blurb about it...I thought something was a bit
iffy because of the time it took to boot the system....not so much
Breezy as Wheezy....
Still, it recognised my usb key, so at least something's up to date..

Steve,
So.... are you going to try updating your kernel?

--
Regards from John Corliss
I don't reply to trolls and other such idiots. No adware, cdware,
commercial software, crippleware, demoware, nagware, PROmotionware,
shareware, spyware, time-limited software, trialware, viruses or warez
please.

 

[Richard Steinfeld]

The Op is presenting his facts as if ONLY freeware
would mess a system up, but the contrary is true, and all
in all, he is denigrating freeware all over his post.
That is called trolling.

By-the-way before clicking on the dreadfull "exe", get a
helmet, or install things with total uninstal or get a spare
drive with a test system.

"...without technical expertise" --> i'm not concerned

laurent

You are full of crap, laurent.
I have said and implied nothing of the sort, and I do not denigrate
freeware. It's a great realm.

Of course, there's tons of buggy payware.
Please read some of my other posts to get a well-rounded picture of
where I'm at. I think that the severe example that I presented in my
post spoke for itself.

Software publishing companies can afford to hire experienced coders,
people disciplined in software engineering, do thorough tests for
compatilibility, debug stuff, _write documentation,_ and provide
support. You don't get very much of this with freeware. Some freeware
is, as I wrote, sloppily done. It comes with the territory. Some
freeware is elegant and superbly crafted.

Note that uninstall programs sometimes don't do a good job of setting a
system right. And do your homework: Total Uninstall is now payware!

Richard

 

[Richard Steinfeld]

No, the OP has decided that there are no freeware solutions to suit his
disk imaging needs, and so he thinks it's a good idea to open up a
discussion about payware solutions.

WRONG!
I just used a freeware utility to clone my hard drive. It was
successful. The program is Partition Logic.

Richard

 

[SpaceCadet]

I've kept everything
I've said in the spirit of this newsgroup and any one that see's it
differently can certainly kill-file me or simply not read the post.

Bob S.

Good on ya mate. Your contributions to this thread have been well reasoned
and well expressed. I doubt that many of the 'silent majority' will
killfile you. As for the 'purists', well, they create as much "off topic"
traffic as anyone else with their bleating about OT subjects.

 

[Richard Steinfeld]

[email protected]:




At least have the courtesy to mark your thread OT.

And since you've decided to go against the "spirit" of a freeware group,
don't expect people to be so eager to help you in the future.

Jacaranda, my post was on-topic and in the spirit of this freeware
group. Your spirit may differ. It's a free country. I intentionally did
not flag it "OT."

People in this group have been helpful to me, and if you peruse former
threads, you'll find that I have made a number of good contributions
based on my experience with freeware and my test driving. Hell, how
about saying "thank you" for those contributins, as well as my
presentation of a serious issue.

Your last sentence sounds like that televangelist who recently warned
Pennsylvania townspeople that they shouldn't expect any help from God in
an emergency because they'd voted out the school board that tried to put
their church into everyone's state. You have warned me, and I reply, "crap."

I don't anticipate anyone here giving me the cold shoulder.

Richard

 

[Steve H]

Steve,
So.... are you going to try updating your kernel?

Yeah, I'll give it a go - should be fun!

There's no sign of any suitable packages 'ready rubbed' on either the
hard drive or the OS CD - even the installation help file refers to
files that don't exist on the drive, so I'll have to faff about with
the raw kernels I have on another disk.
I've got to add some audio codecs too..seems that it's not content
with emulating a 386 in speed, it also won't play MP3s out of the box.

Reminds me of WFW3.11 in some ways..

Regards,

 

[John Corliss]

Yeah, I'll give it a go - should be fun!

There's no sign of any suitable packages 'ready rubbed' on either the
hard drive or the OS CD - even the installation help file refers to
files that don't exist on the drive, so I'll have to faff about with
the raw kernels I have on another disk.

Yes, as that article said "I initially filed a bug report, but the
developers replied that the Ubuntu CD just doesn't have room for
multiple kernels". This seems like a very poor choice on the Ubuntu
developers' part. How hard would it have been to make different versions
of the .isos available, with say, i686 and an i786 version kernels (hope
I got that right). I mean, how many people are running 386 Intels these
days?

I've got to add some audio codecs too..seems that it's not content
with emulating a 386 in speed, it also won't play MP3s out of the box.

Reminds me of WFW3.11 in some ways..

Your problem here concerns me. I just purchased a small cheap hard drive
(40 gb Seagate) so that I could dedicate it to trying Linux. In the last
two days, I downloaded and burnt both the Ubuntu DVD .iso and the SuSE
DVD "Trial" (don't know why they call it that) version .iso. Now I guess
I might as well download Mandriva too.

I'm sure there are advantages to there being so many distros, but the
fact is, "Divide and conquer." As long as Linux comes in so many
varieties, it will never be a serious competitor with Windows. Not only
that, but development will continue to be unfocused and splintered.

--
Regards from John Corliss
I don't reply to trolls and other such idiots. No adware, cdware,
commercial software, crippleware, demoware, nagware, PROmotionware,
shareware, spyware, time-limited software, trialware, viruses or warez
please.

 

[John Corliss]

John,

The quote was from a post you made that I found in the archives when
searching to see if there was a charter - which there is none. It was
mentioned in the thread that the FAQ was written by "John", no last name
given as I recall so it may be the other person you named as being the
originator of the FAQ. My apologizes if I'm mistaken.

Although I was indeed one of two "Johns" that wrote one of the two
original F.A.Q.s for this group, I have taken down my website and am no
longer maintaining my version of the F.A.Q. You are undoubtedly refering
to John Fitzsimons' version.

The sites listed above as freeware sites are known to be reputable and I've
downloaded files from all of them. I believe only 1 (nonags) of these 3,
state on their sites that the files have been checked for viruses but as for
functionality of the program - we're on our own. Just because it's on their
site does not mean it runs correctly on all systems nor that it's been
thoroughly tested for any particular hardware configuration. I'll bet if I
looked hard enough, most freeware distribution sites have the disclaimers
about the software just as the authors do - essentially saying, "Use at your
own risk"

Such disclaimers are obviously necessary for legal reasons.

I would agree, that the perception that since it's posted there, it must be
good - but that is no guarantee.

Nothing in life is certain. It is simply a matter of degree and common
sense. On the one extreme, if somebody by the name of say,
"mastervirusmaker" comes to this group and says "try my new program that
does etc." and only posts download link with the message, then a person
would be a fool to download it and try it. On the other hand, most good
freeware sites only list software that they've tried and can recommend.

Remember when ZDNet used to allow free
access to their software and there was a counter of the number of downloads
for the software and reviews were posted? At least with that you had some
idea how popular a program was and what was thought about it. Is there
anything like that available for freeware today that we can believe?

Both Nonags and Snapfiles have end-user feedback mechanisms in place,
Pricelessware obviously is all reviewed and discussed in this group.

This is the forum to discuss these matters "relating to freeware" and all
that entails. What some may object to may be exactly what I and others are
looking for and no, it won't necessarily be found in other forums - been
there, done that.

This is pretty much a generalization. When I have a hardware problem, I
don't ask about it here - I take the question to alt.comp.hardware. When
I have a question about commercial software, I look to see if there's an
online forum or F.A.Q. for the program first. This group is supposed to
be for the discussion of freeware and staying on topic is a fundamental
principle of netiquette.

I would encourage dialog here that warned of problems
about a particular program but also advise that the negatives and positives
are opinions of a particular configuration and user and may not be valid for
others. When someone asks about a particular program or class of program in
this forum, there is often many detailed comments that are extremely
beneficial - both pro and con and there are often comparisons made between
programs that are shareware, commercial, and just about any other
description - and that is good. It provides a broader view and someone may
find that the $100 program they're considering has an equivalent in freeware
or shareware. That is valuable information and in such a widely read ng
such as this, those meaningful discussions go a long way in educating a lot
of potential users.

Telling people that their post doesn't meet your particular criteria is
doing a disservice. Not to mention the fact that there is no official
criteria for what can and cannot be posted here - no matter what anyone
thinks. This is not a moderated group, no charter and it's Usenet..... what
could be better...;-) The spam and truly OT posts sometimes out number
posts relating to freeware. You don't and can't stop those - so why
chastise those that have valid comments to contribute? We're here to learn
and to offer advise to others when we can.

Remember this item:

Amendment 1.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or
prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech,
or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to
petition the government for a redress of grievances.

This is an international newsgroup. United States law has no place here.

In the absence of any charter or other reasonable and enforceable
restrictions to limit discussion here, I'd say it wins out - and it is
enforceable - even on Usenet.

This is an old, and very hashed over discussion in this group. Staying
on topic is fundamental to the normal functioning of usenet. If this
group becomes diluted with discussion of non-freeware topics, then
people will become frustrated with having to weed out all the chaff and
the group will loose it's effectiveness.

Yes, the group is unmoderated and you can talk about anything you want -
just don't be surprised if the regulars here pile onto you if you start
ruining the group with such threads. The group is "controlled" (for lack
of a better word) via common sense and good behavior on the part of its
participants. If you want continually talk about off topic stuff, you
will only wind up getting killfiled by the regulars and will be "left
out of the loop."

--
Regards from John Corliss
I don't reply to trolls and other such idiots. No adware, cdware,
commercial software, crippleware, demoware, nagware, PROmotionware,
shareware, spyware, time-limited software, trialware, viruses or warez
please.

 

[John Corliss]

WRONG!
I just used a freeware utility to clone my hard drive. It was
successful. The program is Partition Logic.

http://partitionlogic.org.uk/index.html

Richard,
Thanks for pointing out this program. I'm going to give it a try.

--
Regards from John Corliss
I don't reply to trolls and other such idiots. No adware, cdware,
commercial software, crippleware, demoware, nagware, PROmotionware,
shareware, spyware, time-limited software, trialware, viruses or warez
please.