Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

TiVo OS is not PNP

Last response: in Home Theatre Legacy
Share
Anonymous
April 23, 2005 10:06:47 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (More info?)

Hiya,

Don't get me wrong, I *Love* my TiVo. It's one of life's conveniences
that once you become acostomed to it, it places itself on the "Can't
do without list".

But if a component in the loop that you have set up, (TV, DVD, TiVo,
VCR) for example needs to be removed, because it no longer functions,
and thus the connections are changed:

You need to tell TiVo that you are no longer receiving Video through
RF, but through RCA cables. If you do not go thru that step, you will
receive the Tivo Blue Screen that refers to the fact that no video
signal is being received, and here are the steps that you shoud try to
regain a video signal.

But nowhere did it say to check that the TiVo knows from where the
video signal is coming from...or how to chage it if it not correct.

It should be, emphasis on should, it should be a plug and play system,
just like windows.

Mooch

More about : tivo pnp

April 24, 2005 5:46:01 AM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (More info?)

Mooch <moochito@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:75rl61d3jfs7h20q29a9o6t851pbkcacul@4ax.com:

> It should be, emphasis on should, it should be a plug and play system,
> just like windows.

BWA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!

*wipes a tear from his eye* Oh man, that's a good one.

What? You were serious? Oh, that just makes it sad. I have two monitors
on my windows box, and when I set them up, I had to tell it which was
which...use this is the primary, this as the secondary. An even closer
analogy, I have multiple (and oh man, do I mean MULTIPLE) sound inputs, and
unlike your suggestion for TiVo (and implication about Windows) it does NOT
magically know what one I want to use at any given time. And if I DO tell
it "always use this one" and then I change things around, it does exactly
what you would expect (not want...expect): it continues trying to use the
one I told it to until/unless I tell it to use another.

--
Minister of All Things Digital & Electronic, and Holder of Past Knowledge
stile99@email.com. Cabal# 24601-fnord | Sleep is irrelevant.
I speak for no one but myself, and |Caffeine will be assimilated.
no one else speaks for me. O- | Decaf is futile.
Anonymous
April 24, 2005 3:04:25 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (More info?)

Get a grip. If you screw around with removing devices you should expect to
have to do something about it. Besides, it's possible for a Tivo (or any
video device) to have more than one thing connected. Do you know how
maddening it would be if a video device started guessing which one to use
instead of letting me choose it? No thanks.

As for comparisons to Windows, you obviously don't grasp the implications...

"Mooch" <moochito@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:75rl61d3jfs7h20q29a9o6t851pbkcacul@4ax.com...
>
> Don't get me wrong, I *Love* my TiVo. It's one of life's conveniences
> that once you become acostomed to it, it places itself on the "Can't
> do without list".
>
> But if a component in the loop that you have set up, (TV, DVD, TiVo,
> VCR) for example needs to be removed, because it no longer functions,
> and thus the connections are changed:
>
> You need to tell TiVo that you are no longer receiving Video through
> RF, but through RCA cables. If you do not go thru that step, you will
> receive the Tivo Blue Screen that refers to the fact that no video
> signal is being received, and here are the steps that you shoud try to
> regain a video signal.
>
> But nowhere did it say to check that the TiVo knows from where the
> video signal is coming from...or how to chage it if it not correct.
>
> It should be, emphasis on should, it should be a plug and play system,
> just like windows.
Related resources
Can't find your answer ? Ask !
Anonymous
April 24, 2005 4:23:35 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (More info?)

In article <75rl61d3jfs7h20q29a9o6t851pbkcacul@4ax.com>,
Mooch <moochito@hotmail.com> wrote:

> Hiya,
>
> Don't get me wrong, I *Love* my TiVo. It's one of life's conveniences
> that once you become acostomed to it, it places itself on the "Can't
> do without list".
>
> But if a component in the loop that you have set up, (TV, DVD, TiVo,
> VCR) for example needs to be removed, because it no longer functions,
> and thus the connections are changed:
>
> You need to tell TiVo that you are no longer receiving Video through
> RF, but through RCA cables. If you do not go thru that step, you will
> receive the Tivo Blue Screen that refers to the fact that no video
> signal is being received, and here are the steps that you shoud try to
> regain a video signal.
>
> But nowhere did it say to check that the TiVo knows from where the
> video signal is coming from...or how to chage it if it not correct.
>
> It should be, emphasis on should, it should be a plug and play system,
> just like windows.
>
> Mooch

Macintosh is plug and play. Windows is Plug and Pray, working only if
the Drivers are already there.
Anonymous
April 24, 2005 4:23:36 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (More info?)

> Macintosh is plug and play. Windows is Plug and Pray, working only if
> the Drivers are already there.

Yeah but with the Mac you're stuck with only devices made for it. You're
screwed if you want to make use of the hundreds of different suppliers
making all sort of stuff for Windows. No thanks, I'm not paying more for
LESS choice.
Anonymous
April 24, 2005 6:55:42 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (More info?)

In article <aeKdnfGwetgnKPbfRVn-jg@speakeasy.net>, wkearney99
<wkearney99@hotmail.com> wrote:

> > Macintosh is plug and play. Windows is Plug and Pray, working only if
> > the Drivers are already there.
>
> Yeah but with the Mac you're stuck with only devices made for it.

I run a four-year-old Mac. My keyboard, trackball, scanner and laser
printers (b&w and color) were not built for the Mac. The four drives I
installed were not built for the Mac. My DSL modem and router were not
built for the Mac. My monitor was not built for the Mac. Looking at
my setup, I see no peripheral that is Mac-specific or, indeed, has been
adapted or altered in any way to work with the Mac. (Oh, wait. Yeah.
My digital speakers were built for the Mac. They came with it,
though.)

Everything worked the first time, too. In fact, everything works all
the time. My stuff always works.

> You're screwed if you want to make use of the hundreds of different
> suppliers making all sort of stuff for Windows. No thanks, I'm not
> paying more for LESS choice.

Paying less so you can buy more stuff that doesn't work correctly seems
counter-productive to me.
Anonymous
April 24, 2005 7:07:39 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (More info?)

In article <aeKdnfGwetgnKPbfRVn-jg@speakeasy.net>,
"wkearney99" <wkearney99@hotmail.com> wrote:

> > Macintosh is plug and play. Windows is Plug and Pray, working only if
> > the Drivers are already there.
>
> Yeah but with the Mac you're stuck with only devices made for it. You're
> screwed if you want to make use of the hundreds of different suppliers
> making all sort of stuff for Windows. No thanks, I'm not paying more for
> LESS choice.

You'd rather have a Doom Game machine than a reliable computer?
Anonymous
April 24, 2005 7:07:40 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (More info?)

In article <jzwick3-B6FAD9.10073924042005@news1.west.earthlink.net>,
Jack Zwick wrote:
> In article <aeKdnfGwetgnKPbfRVn-jg@speakeasy.net>,
> "wkearney99" <wkearney99@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> > Macintosh is plug and play. Windows is Plug and Pray, working only if
>> > the Drivers are already there.
>>
>> Yeah but with the Mac you're stuck with only devices made for it. You're
>> screwed if you want to make use of the hundreds of different suppliers
>> making all sort of stuff for Windows. No thanks, I'm not paying more for
>> LESS choice.
>
> You'd rather have a Doom Game machine than a reliable computer?

Well, I'd rather build a PC with hardware of *my* choosing, dual-boot
Windows and Linux, and have both a game machine *and* a reliable
computer. Installing drivers (or changing input settings on a TiVo)
isn't what I'd call hard work, anyone who thinks it is needs to spend
a shift doing (insert manual labor job here) and find out what work is.

I've nothing against Macs, but they're not the only reliable computer
out there.

Jim
Anonymous
April 24, 2005 7:22:36 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (More info?)

Jack Zwick (jzwick3@mindspring.com) wrote in alt.video.ptv.tivo:
> You'd rather have a Doom Game machine than a reliable computer?

Define "reliable".

Other than needing to reboot for some software installs, there's nothing
that stops my WinXP box from doing what it is supposed to. Some poorly-
written software does crash (and unfortunately sometimes it's software
that I need to use fairly often), but other software keeps running just
fine.

--
Jeff Rife |
| http://www.nabs.net/Cartoons/RhymesWithOrange/Recycling...
Anonymous
April 24, 2005 9:32:00 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (More info?)

Dr. Personality (affable@no.com.invalid) wrote in alt.video.ptv.tivo:
> Everything worked the first time, too. In fact, everything works all
> the time. My stuff always works.

And this is different from a PC how?

Seriously, I have 8 Intel-based PCs running various OS configurations,
and if I have the driver for the hardware, everything works all the time.
And, I do have a broad range of hardware (HDTV tuner cards, scanners,
cameras, camcorders, various portable drives, different video cards, RAID
cards, etc.).

I know that it's exactly the same on a Mac. If the driver isn't included
with the OS and the manufacturer doesn't make one for your OS, you're
pretty much hosed. Otherwise, it works as well as the driver is written.

Unless, of course, you have a non-OS related problem, like when I was
trying to write to an SD card using a USB 2.0 card reader and couldn't.
It turned out something inside the reader was catching the "write protect"
slider on insertion, and the card was always write-protected inside the
reader, but the slider moved back to the "unlock" position when you pulled
it out. Really tough to diagnose and it would have had the same problem
with *any* OS.

> > You're screwed if you want to make use of the hundreds of different
> > suppliers making all sort of stuff for Windows. No thanks, I'm not
> > paying more for LESS choice.
>
> Paying less so you can buy more stuff that doesn't work correctly seems
> counter-productive to me.

Yeah, it would, but you're assuming things don't work right on any computer
but a Mac. That's just wrong.

The biggest issue that the average Windows user has is that they probably
have a virus or twenty (along with some spyware), and that can cause a
*lot* of problems. This is just one of the things you have to learn to
deal with when you use the most popular OS.

--
Jeff Rife |
| http://www.nabs.net/Cartoons/OverTheHedge/StarWars1.gif
Anonymous
April 24, 2005 9:56:04 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (More info?)

In article <MPG.1cd5da5d3d1fc20b989cce@news.nabs.net>, Jeff Rife
<wevsr@nabs.net> wrote:

> Dr. Personality (affable@no.com.invalid) wrote in alt.video.ptv.tivo:

> Seriously, I have 8 Intel-based PCs running various OS configurations,
> and if I have the driver for the hardware, everything works all the time.
> And, I do have a broad range of hardware (HDTV tuner cards, scanners,
> cameras, camcorders, various portable drives, different video cards, RAID
> cards, etc.).
>
> I know that it's exactly the same on a Mac. If the driver isn't included
> with the OS and the manufacturer doesn't make one for your OS, you're
> pretty much hosed. Otherwise, it works as well as the driver is written.
>
> Unless, of course, you have a non-OS related problem, like when I was
> trying to write to an SD card using a USB 2.0 card reader and couldn't.
> It turned out something inside the reader was catching the "write protect"
> slider on insertion, and the card was always write-protected inside the
> reader, but the slider moved back to the "unlock" position when you pulled
> it out. Really tough to diagnose and it would have had the same problem
> with *any* OS.
>
> > > You're screwed if you want to make use of the hundreds of different
> > > suppliers making all sort of stuff for Windows. No thanks, I'm not
> > > paying more for LESS choice.
> >
> > Paying less so you can buy more stuff that doesn't work correctly seems
> > counter-productive to me.
>
> Yeah, it would, but you're assuming things don't work right on any computer
> but a Mac. That's just wrong.

Stipulated. Sorry about that.

> The biggest issue that the average Windows user has is that they probably
> have a virus or twenty (along with some spyware), and that can cause a
> *lot* of problems. This is just one of the things you have to learn to
> deal with when you use the most popular OS.

My point really was to quarrel with the statement that Mac peripherals
had to be manufactured specifically for Macs. That is not true.
Anonymous
April 24, 2005 10:23:52 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (More info?)

>Don't get me wrong, I *Love* my TiVo. It's one of life's conveniences
>that once you become acostomed to it, it places itself on the "Can't
>do without list".
>
>But if a component in the loop that you have set up, (TV, DVD, TiVo,
>VCR) for example needs to be removed, because it no longer functions,
>and thus the connections are changed:
>
>You need to tell TiVo that you are no longer receiving Video through
>RF, but through RCA cables. If you do not go thru that step, you will
>receive the Tivo Blue Screen that refers to the fact that no video
>signal is being received, and here are the steps that you shoud try to
>regain a video signal.

My TiVo receives video through RF (antenna) *AND* the RCA cables
(VCR, to occasionally transfer stuff from video tape). If the
antenna signal gets weak, I *DON'T* want it switching on its own
to the RCA cables (and it will probably not switch back since the
VCR doesn't suffer from signal fade, thereby botching all future
recordings until I notice the problem). Also, the TiVo doesn't know
how to control the channel on the VCR (it really should never need
to in my setup; the VCR doesn't even have RF input connected to
it).

>But nowhere did it say to check that the TiVo knows from where the
>video signal is coming from...or how to chage it if it not correct.

On my version of it (Series 1 standalone), it DOES says this:

3. Check cable connections.
4. Verify video source; try connecting it directly to your TV.


>It should be, emphasis on should, it should be a plug and play system,
>just like windows.

Oh, you mean how Windows labels the drives in an order IT likes, so
if you add a partition to one drive, it breaks all your scripts
that refer to stuff on another drive?

How do you propose that TiVo figure out how to control the channel on
what's connected to the RCA jacks? Spray out IR codes to control every
device it ever heard of until it thinks it's got it right? (and how
does it determine that?)

Gordon L. Burditt
Anonymous
April 25, 2005 12:47:56 AM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (More info?)

Dr. Personality (affable@no.com.invalid) wrote in alt.video.ptv.tivo:
> My point really was to quarrel with the statement that Mac peripherals
> had to be manufactured specifically for Macs. That is not true.

Yeah, it was the case about 2-3 generations of Mac ago, but not anymore.

A lot of that is because Apple dropped a lot of the proprietary nature of
the hardware and started using industry standards. We all remember when
you had to use special software to "mark" a generic hard drive so that the
Mac OS thought it was a "real" Apple drive. There was no physical difference
between the drives...it's just that the Apple branded drives were formatted
before being shipped out, and had a signature on the drive that the OS looked
for.

--
Jeff Rife | "Hey, Brain, what do you wanna do tonight?"
|
| "The same thing we do every night, Pinky...
| try to take over the world."
Anonymous
April 25, 2005 1:43:37 AM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (More info?)

Jeff Rife wrote:
> Dr. Personality (affable@no.com.invalid) wrote in alt.video.ptv.tivo:
>
>>My point really was to quarrel with the statement that Mac peripherals
>>had to be manufactured specifically for Macs. That is not true.
>
>
> Yeah, it was the case about 2-3 generations of Mac ago, but not anymore.
>
> A lot of that is because Apple dropped a lot of the proprietary nature of
> the hardware and started using industry standards. We all remember when
> you had to use special software to "mark" a generic hard drive so that the
> Mac OS thought it was a "real" Apple drive. There was no physical difference
> between the drives...it's just that the Apple branded drives were formatted
> before being shipped out, and had a signature on the drive that the OS looked
> for.
>


As a PC-based person, I completely agree with that. With Mac supporting
most of the standard peripheral interconnects now (and having been the
first to support them on a few), peripheral support on a Mac is much
wider now. Sometimes they get a *little* too forward thinking for their
own good (I run into problems now and then with visiting Lecturers
trying to hook up newer Mac laptops to ceiling projectors with only DVI
video outputs and not having a DVI/RGB converter), but that straightens
out over time.

It's still not fun to have to replace a core component, like a
Motherboard, but virtually anything else isn't too tough to find.

The only major trade-offs w/ Macs that I see now are somewhat higher
prices for equivalent hardware, not much group management software
available (doesn't mean much for a home user, but try managing 500
clients, Active Directory is sooooooo useful), and there was something
else, but I've now forgotten ;-). There are definite advantages as
well, smoother and more cohesive overall interface, better overall app
reliability (mostly because of better quality control). My biggest
complaint, OS inflexibility, has basically evaporated w/ the release of
OS X and later.

The biggest problem I have these days are with Mac zealots, not Macs. I
manage *one* employee who refuses to use anything but Macs. That in
itself is fine, but I have to hear from him every time I help him do
something (usually setting up some network connection or other) how it
would be so much better if I switched everybody over to Macs. No matter
how many times I list the number of reasons that I think it would be a
bad idea in our business setting, I have to hear the same thing every
time. The ironic thing is that he hires a lot of people use a
particular software package (ArcGIS) that runs only on Windows, so
switching to Macs would pretty much put him out of a job.

Randy S.
Anonymous
April 25, 2005 1:46:37 AM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (More info?)

> Oh, you mean how Windows labels the drives in an order IT likes, so
> if you add a partition to one drive, it breaks all your scripts
> that refer to stuff on another drive?

Yeah, that's a pain. Usually pretty easy to fix, fortunately. However,
*never* put two functional primary Operating System drives in the same
system at once. Windows gets all discombobulated and will mix the boot
partition and the swap files up, so that it won't run once you format or
remove the second disk. It's fixable, but not easily.

Randy S.
Anonymous
April 25, 2005 3:55:07 AM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (More info?)

Randy S. (rswittNO@SPAMgmail.com) wrote in alt.video.ptv.tivo:
> However,
> *never* put two functional primary Operating System drives in the same
> system at once. Windows gets all discombobulated and will mix the boot
> partition and the swap files up, so that it won't run once you format or
> remove the second disk.

I've never seen this problem, and I often put a bootable disk into another
machine in order to do something you can't do with the OS running off
that install.

But, if it were a problem, I would just stuff the second drive into an
external USB case and plug it in, do my thing, then unplug it.

--
Jeff Rife |
| http://www.nabs.net/Cartoons/Dilbert/MoneyNotDogs.gif
Anonymous
April 25, 2005 12:21:19 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (More info?)

Jeff Rife wrote:
> Randy S. (rswittNO@SPAMgmail.com) wrote in alt.video.ptv.tivo:
>
>> However,
>>*never* put two functional primary Operating System drives in the same
>>system at once. Windows gets all discombobulated and will mix the boot
>>partition and the swap files up, so that it won't run once you format or
>>remove the second disk.
>
>
> I've never seen this problem, and I often put a bootable disk into another
> machine in order to do something you can't do with the OS running off
> that install.
>
> But, if it were a problem, I would just stuff the second drive into an
> external USB case and plug it in, do my thing, then unplug it.
>

I've managed to duplicate the situation several times, it has something
to do with the Windows signature of the drives (both being C: but with
different signatures) and some legacy path designations in the registry.
The system seems to use the correct system directory and files, but
use the incorrect swap file. Then the 2nd drive's swap file gets hard
coded into the registry, and if you try to run without the second drive,
the OS will give you a missing virtual memory error when you try to
login. I think it requires that the 2nd disk be *identical* (data-wise)
to the 1st, I run into this problem mostly when I'm upgrading an old,
small HDD system drive to a larger one, then use the old one as a
smaller secondary data drive.

Usually booting to restore console (or any other command window you
choose to use) and running a fdisk /mbr fixes it, since that erases the
disk signatures and Windows has to remake them. The /mbr switch will
also reletter your drives for you if you end up stuck with a non-c:
system drive (don't ask, it's happened).

The USB trick would work, except I'd wonder whether some of the new
boards and bioses that support booting from USB drives might still have
a problem.

Randy S.
Anonymous
April 25, 2005 2:38:25 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (More info?)

Randy S. (rswittno@spamgmail.com) wrote in alt.video.ptv.tivo:
> The USB trick would work, except I'd wonder whether some of the new
> boards and bioses that support booting from USB drives might still have
> a problem.

Nope. The boot sequence from the BIOS just determines what drive to boot
off of. You might end up booting off the USB drive, but if you don't,
Windows doesn't initialize USB until long after non-USB drives are enumerated,
so the swap file, etc., is already set up by the time it sees the drive.

--
Jeff Rife |
| http://www.nabs.net/Cartoons/RhymesWithOrange/MailerDae...
Anonymous
April 25, 2005 3:18:03 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (More info?)

> I run a four-year-old Mac. My keyboard, trackball, scanner and laser
> printers (b&w and color) were not built for the Mac.

Yeah, except those USB keyboard requirements are a bit of a pain. Oh,
powering up from the keyboard? Not without spending extra for apple's
bastardization of the usb spec for it...

> Everything worked the first time, too. In fact, everything works all
> the time. My stuff always works.

As do all the devices on my PCs.

> Paying less so you can buy more stuff that doesn't work correctly seems
> counter-productive to me.

Except that it does work. Hey, I'm all for choice. PCs give me more of it.
That some folks don't choose wisely doesn't mean they should forsake choice
for a dictatorial and obscenely proprietary vendor.
Anonymous
April 25, 2005 3:18:53 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (More info?)

> My point really was to quarrel with the statement that Mac peripherals
> had to be manufactured specifically for Macs. That is not true.

Oh it certainly is true. Once you get outside the mere basics of device
features unless Mac drivers are written for it you can't make use of it's
features.
Anonymous
April 25, 2005 3:20:21 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (More info?)

"Jack Zwick" <jzwick3@mindspring.com> wrote in message news:jzwick3-
> You'd rather have a Doom Game machine than a reliable computer?

No, I'd rather have the option to use any number of vendors for my
accesories instead of overpriced ones from a limited set of vendors.
Anonymous
April 25, 2005 3:27:04 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (More info?)

> The biggest problem I have these days are with Mac zealots, not Macs. I
> manage *one* employee who refuses to use anything but Macs.

Heh, the 'underdog' syndrome. Pathetic, isn't it?

Macs work great if you're one person doing one person's job. As you start
scaling up into shifts of people across departments the utter lack of any
enterprise features make the MacOS a complete non-starter. But those
'empowered' induhviduals don't see the big picture. It's sad, but hey,
that's marketing for you. Who wants to be sold on being a productive wage
slave as part of a well functioning large company? Nobody. Everybody wants
to pretend they're something special. Ain't gonna happen but advertising
pimps the message anyway. Thus, Apple.

> so switching to Macs would pretty much put him out of a job.

Tempting propostion, eh?
Anonymous
April 25, 2005 8:48:22 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (More info?)

In article <FYKdndspfYjVkfDfRVn-2w@speakeasy.net>,
"wkearney99" <wkearney99@hotmail.com> wrote:

> > The biggest problem I have these days are with Mac zealots, not Macs. I
> > manage *one* employee who refuses to use anything but Macs.
>
> Heh, the 'underdog' syndrome. Pathetic, isn't it?
>
> Macs work great if you're one person doing one person's job. As you start
> scaling up into shifts of people across departments the utter lack of any
> enterprise features make the MacOS a complete non-starter.

Total fiction. Macs are for more manageable and predictable in the
enterprize than PCs. They dont get turned into S{AMMing zombies for one.
Anonymous
April 25, 2005 8:48:23 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (More info?)

Jack Zwick (jzwick3@mindspring.com) wrote in alt.video.ptv.tivo:
> > Macs work great if you're one person doing one person's job. As you start
> > scaling up into shifts of people across departments the utter lack of any
> > enterprise features make the MacOS a complete non-starter.
>
> Total fiction. Macs are for more manageable and predictable in the
> enterprize than PCs.

Not really. If you want to enforce a policy across a bunch of machines,
Mac OS has nothing that matches Active Directory for that sort of thing.
Sure, you can configure each Mac separately, but if you want to change
from expiring passwords every 180 days to every 120 days, it's a bear to
do when you have to touch 500 machines.

There are 3rd-party *nux solutions to this sort of thing, but nothing
straight from Apple.

> They dont get turned into S{AMMing zombies for one.

This is another fallacy. This won't happen to a correctly configured PC
in an enterprise. You can easily make sure that every machine has the
latest anti-virus software and definitions.

--
Jeff Rife |
| http://www.nabs.net/Cartoons/OverTheHedge/SlowInternet....
Anonymous
April 25, 2005 8:49:28 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (More info?)

In article <R8ednUzeBcU9lvDfRVn-og@speakeasy.net>,
"wkearney99" <wkearney99@hotmail.com> wrote:

>
> "Jack Zwick" <jzwick3@mindspring.com> wrote in message news:jzwick3-
> > You'd rather have a Doom Game machine than a reliable computer?
>
> No, I'd rather have the option to use any number of vendors for my
> accesories instead of overpriced ones from a limited set of vendors.

With Blue Tooth, USB 2 and Firewire 800, there is plenty of choice in
the Macintosh paradigm. You can choose on price or quality.
Anonymous
April 25, 2005 8:50:03 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (More info?)

In article <s9KdnRHdvLTDl_DfRVn-tQ@speakeasy.net>,
"wkearney99" <wkearney99@hotmail.com> wrote:

> > My point really was to quarrel with the statement that Mac peripherals
> > had to be manufactured specifically for Macs. That is not true.
>
> Oh it certainly is true. Once you get outside the mere basics of device
> features unless Mac drivers are written for it you can't make use of it's
> features.

Nice try. Obviously never used a Mac.
Anonymous
April 25, 2005 8:50:04 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (More info?)

Jack Zwick (jzwick3@mindspring.com) wrote in alt.video.ptv.tivo:
> In article <s9KdnRHdvLTDl_DfRVn-tQ@speakeasy.net>,
> "wkearney99" <wkearney99@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > My point really was to quarrel with the statement that Mac peripherals
> > > had to be manufactured specifically for Macs. That is not true.
> >
> > Oh it certainly is true. Once you get outside the mere basics of device
> > features unless Mac drivers are written for it you can't make use of it's
> > features.
>
> Nice try. Obviously never used a Mac.

Although the broad generalization about there not being many peripherals
that a Mac can use is false, it's 100% true that without drivers, the
hardware just doesn't work. This is true for any OS.

Mac OS (like Windows and Linux) has drivers for a *lot* of hardware built
in, and 3rd parties often make drivers for the Mac. But, there is a lot
of hardware that isn't supported. Since this is a newsgroup about DVRs,
it seems appropriate to mention that there are very few HDTV cards that
have Mac drivers. The Mac solution has been to use FireWire to capture
from STBs, but that doesn't work for encrypted channels, and ties up the
STB. A card like the MIT MDP-130 will capture the same digital cable
channels that you could using a cable STB and FireWire, and free up the
STB to watch TV while you record something else.

--
Jeff Rife |
| http://www.nabs.net/Cartoons/OverTheHedge/TreeChainsaw....
Anonymous
April 25, 2005 8:51:56 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (More info?)

In article <s9KdnRbdvLTAl_DfRVn-tQ@speakeasy.net>,
"wkearney99" <wkearney99@hotmail.com> wrote:

> > I run a four-year-old Mac. My keyboard, trackball, scanner and laser
> > printers (b&w and color) were not built for the Mac.
>
> Yeah, except those USB keyboard requirements are a bit of a pain. Oh,
> powering up from the keyboard? Not without spending extra for apple's
> bastardization of the usb spec for it...
>
> > Everything worked the first time, too. In fact, everything works all
> > the time. My stuff always works.
>
> As do all the devices on my PCs.
>
> > Paying less so you can buy more stuff that doesn't work correctly seems
> > counter-productive to me.
>
> Except that it does work. Hey, I'm all for choice. PCs give me more of it.
> That some folks don't choose wisely doesn't mean they should forsake choice
> for a dictatorial and obscenely proprietary vendor.

You need to have the choice of hundreds of keyboards instead of only
d0zens with a Mac? Get Real. I have a Microsoft Wireless Elite Keyboard
on my G5 tower as I type this.
Anonymous
April 25, 2005 10:39:58 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (More info?)

On 2005-04-25, Jeff Rife <wevsr@nabs.net> wrote:
>
> This is another fallacy. This won't happen to a correctly configured PC
> in an enterprise. You can easily make sure that every machine has the
> latest anti-virus software and definitions.
>

But you can't make sure the latest anti-virus software and definitions
will protect your PC from the latest worms/virus/etc. out there.

Plus, you then need to talk about Windows patches which may actually break
required software so then you're talking about staffing to test that the
patches don't break stuff and that causes a time delay between the release
and the installation of the patches, and this says nothing of the case of
what to do when your required software applications don't work with the
patches.
Anonymous
April 25, 2005 10:40:06 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (More info?)

In article <s9KdnRbdvLTAl_DfRVn-tQ@speakeasy.net>, wkearney99
<wkearney99@hotmail.com> wrote:

> > I run a four-year-old Mac. My keyboard, trackball, scanner and laser
> > printers (b&w and color) were not built for the Mac.
>
> Yeah, except those USB keyboard requirements are a bit of a pain. Oh,
> powering up from the keyboard? Not without spending extra for apple's
> bastardization of the usb spec for it...

You originally said peripherals for the Mac have to be built
specifically for the Mac. Let's not forget the original point here.

Now it's "powering up from the keyboard"? Who cares? I have to reach
over a whole six inches or so to hit the power button on the Mac
itself. If this powering up from the keyboard thing is important to
you, fine, but to me it sounds like a reach (no pun intended).

As for the "bastardiazation of the USB spec," I'm running a scanner and
three printers off USB. All non-Apple. No problems.

> > Everything worked the first time, too. In fact, everything works all
> > the time. My stuff always works.
>
> As do all the devices on my PCs.
>
> > Paying less so you can buy more stuff that doesn't work correctly seems
> > counter-productive to me.
>
> Except that it does work. Hey, I'm all for choice. PCs give me more of it.
> That some folks don't choose wisely doesn't mean they should forsake choice
> for a dictatorial and obscenely proprietary vendor.

I see those choices as uselessly broad. They don't matter to me at all.
Anonymous
April 25, 2005 10:40:08 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (More info?)

In article <s9KdnRHdvLTDl_DfRVn-tQ@speakeasy.net>, wkearney99
<wkearney99@hotmail.com> wrote:

> > My point really was to quarrel with the statement that Mac peripherals
> > had to be manufactured specifically for Macs. That is not true.
>
> Oh it certainly is true.

Of course it's not true. Worse, it's obviously false. And as I've
already said, I don't have a single peripheral that was built for the
Mac (except the speakers that came with it, as I've mentioned).

> Once you get outside the mere basics of device
> features unless Mac drivers are written for it you can't make use of it's
> features.

Yes, you (occasionally) need device drivers written for the Mac. You
need drivers for any OS. Could that be more obvious? However, these
drivers are almost always provided with the device, and sometimes
they're already included in the OS. I have never bought a peripheral
that didn't come with a Mac driver, and sometimes I didn't need the
driver anyway because it was already in the OS.

You like "choice." That's fine, but it doesn't persuade me.
Anonymous
April 25, 2005 10:43:42 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (More info?)

Mike Hunt wrote:
> On 2005-04-25, Jeff Rife <wevsr@nabs.net> wrote:
>
>>This is another fallacy. This won't happen to a correctly configured PC
>>in an enterprise. You can easily make sure that every machine has the
>>latest anti-virus software and definitions.
>>
>
>
> But you can't make sure the latest anti-virus software and definitions
> will protect your PC from the latest worms/virus/etc. out there.

Mike, if you have enterprise level solutions (which is what we're
discussing here) you can be pretty much on top of this with little
effort. And even with the increased attack levels on PC's, the tools
that are available make it faster and easier to patch 1000 PC's than 20
Macs. So even if I have to patch Macs twice a year, and PC's 30 times,
the PCs actually take me less time.

> Plus, you then need to talk about Windows patches which may actually break
> required software so then you're talking about staffing to test that the
> patches don't break stuff and that causes a time delay between the release
> and the installation of the patches, and this says nothing of the case of
> what to do when your required software applications don't work with the
> patches.

This is a relative rarity in a controlled enterprise environment. The
real problem where this occurs is on servers, not clients, and that's
going to be a problem no matter which OS you are using.

But the truth is, I manage both, though far fewer Macs. The Macs play
well on the network, are very stable and the users love them. But I
have very little policy enforcement flexibility on them so users screw
them up more often *or* have to bring them to me far too often to
install things. Plus it's *extremely* frustrating to me to have to pay
for virtually every point release of their OS, though I understand
their numbering system is different than MS's. A good metaphor is
herding cows versus herding cats; the cows (pc's) are boring and
predictable and easily led, the cats (Macs) are clever and pretty and do
things you told them not to (like install forbidden applications) ;-).

Plus, Mac needs to build in a remote desktop parallel, right now the
only similar solution is quite expensive!

Randy S.
Anonymous
April 25, 2005 10:52:05 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (More info?)

> Mac OS (like Windows and Linux) has drivers for a *lot* of hardware built
> in, and 3rd parties often make drivers for the Mac. But, there is a lot
> of hardware that isn't supported. Since this is a newsgroup about DVRs,
> it seems appropriate to mention that there are very few HDTV cards that
> have Mac drivers. The Mac solution has been to use FireWire to capture
> from STBs, but that doesn't work for encrypted channels, and ties up the
> STB. A card like the MIT MDP-130 will capture the same digital cable
> channels that you could using a cable STB and FireWire, and free up the
> STB to watch TV while you record something else.
>

To be fair, unless I was buying a machine for a *specific* purpose (like
an HTPC), I wouldn't avoid a Mac because of lack of peripherals. There
may be some holes (and you make a good example), but you can get pretty
much anything you need. Plus, they're generally designed nicer. One
thing I will always give credit to Apple for, they are some of the best
industrial designers out there, period. They understand the importance
of UI as well as Tivo does, which is why I think a lot of people draw
parallels between the two.

The failing of Apple in the Enterprise right now is not their hardware,
but that they still take a bottom up (clients) approach when business
managers and admins want a top down (administration, policy enforcement,
manageability) approach. Microsoft cracked that market *well* when they
released Active Directory (a *huge* upgrade from the old NT domains),
and have nearly blown Novell out of the market with it. There is a
middle ground. If Apple doesn't want to get into that software segment,
they could build in and release Active directory policies that could be
managed by Active Directory. Then my department could be truly OS
agnostic because I could enforce policies on *all* clients. Of course
that will happen when pigs fly ;-).

Randy S.
Anonymous
April 26, 2005 1:50:24 AM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (More info?)

> Yes, you (occasionally) need device drivers written for the Mac. You
> need drivers for any OS. Could that be more obvious? However, these
> drivers are almost always provided with the device, and sometimes
> they're already included in the OS. I have never bought a peripheral
> that didn't come with a Mac driver, and sometimes I didn't need the
> driver anyway because it was already in the OS.
>
> You like "choice." That's fine, but it doesn't persuade me.

I've seen a lot of peripherals that didn't ship with Mac drivers, but
that very prominently displayed a web site to go to download them. Not
that I have any problem with that, or that it should make anyone pause
from purchasing it. Just a clarification.

Randy S.
Anonymous
April 26, 2005 3:12:26 AM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (More info?)

In article <116qebudjm3mr42@corp.supernews.com>,
Mike Hunt <in2sheep@yahoo.com> wrote:

> But you can't make sure the latest anti-virus software and definitions
> will protect your PC from the latest worms/virus/etc. out there.

DUH, THATS EXACTLY WHAT ANTIVIRUS SOFTWARE DOES, PROVIDED YOU KEEP IT
UPDATED.
Anonymous
April 26, 2005 3:13:24 AM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (More info?)

In article <d4k6p0$1cvo$2@spnode25.nerdc.ufl.edu>, Randy S.
<rswittNO@SPAMgmail.com> wrote:

> > Yes, you (occasionally) need device drivers written for the Mac. You
> > need drivers for any OS. Could that be more obvious? However, these
> > drivers are almost always provided with the device, and sometimes
> > they're already included in the OS. I have never bought a peripheral
> > that didn't come with a Mac driver, and sometimes I didn't need the
> > driver anyway because it was already in the OS.
> >
> > You like "choice." That's fine, but it doesn't persuade me.
>
> I've seen a lot of peripherals that didn't ship with Mac drivers, but
> that very prominently displayed a web site to go to download them. Not
> that I have any problem with that, or that it should make anyone pause
> from purchasing it. Just a clarification.

I haven't run into that myself, but I'm always happy to have the record
clarified. Thanks.
Anonymous
April 26, 2005 3:25:37 AM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (More info?)

>> But you can't make sure the latest anti-virus software and definitions
>> will protect your PC from the latest worms/virus/etc. out there.
>
>DUH, THATS EXACTLY WHAT ANTIVIRUS SOFTWARE DOES, PROVIDED YOU KEEP IT
>UPDATED.

No, it doesn't. Someone has to get the virus FIRST. It then takes
time to turn a virus sample into a virus definition and get it into
the distributed updates. Anti-virus companies may act quickly, but
they will always lag behind the virus writers. And during that lag,
some systems will get the virus.

Gordon L. Burditt
Anonymous
April 26, 2005 3:25:38 AM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (More info?)

Gordon Burditt wrote:
>>>But you can't make sure the latest anti-virus software and definitions
>>>will protect your PC from the latest worms/virus/etc. out there.
>>
>>DUH, THATS EXACTLY WHAT ANTIVIRUS SOFTWARE DOES, PROVIDED YOU KEEP IT
>>UPDATED.
>
>
> No, it doesn't. Someone has to get the virus FIRST. It then takes
> time to turn a virus sample into a virus definition and get it into
> the distributed updates. Anti-virus companies may act quickly, but
> they will always lag behind the virus writers. And during that lag,
> some systems will get the virus.
>
> Gordon L. Burditt

But this applies to *all* OS'es not just MS. If you look closely at
vulnerability announcements you will notice that MS announcements are
fairly steady (SP2 has helped some), while OS X announcements are UP
(bugtraq shows 5 flaws in OS X from last October through January, and
*14* from January till now. Windows had 23 from October through
January, and 27 from January until now). I'm not trying to say that
Windows is getting any better, but that hackers are becoming more
familiar with OS X. Don't kid yourself in thinking that OS X is
invulnerable, it's only a matter of time. And the more popular it
becomes, the more of a target it will be.

For comparison, look at Firefox. As nice as a browser as it is (and I
use it all the time), folks were touting it as *inherently safer*. But
now we've three security releases in as many months. *ALL* software is
vulnerable to security flaws, it's just a fact of life.

Randy S.
Anonymous
April 26, 2005 7:26:08 AM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (More info?)

In article <116qv3ha22cs173@corp.supernews.com>,
gordonb.3pf64@burditt.org (Gordon Burditt) wrote:

> >> But you can't make sure the latest anti-virus software and definitions
> >> will protect your PC from the latest worms/virus/etc. out there.
> >
> >DUH, THATS EXACTLY WHAT ANTIVIRUS SOFTWARE DOES, PROVIDED YOU KEEP IT
> >UPDATED.
>
> No, it doesn't. Someone has to get the virus FIRST. It then takes
> time to turn a virus sample into a virus definition and get it into
> the distributed updates. Anti-virus companies may act quickly, but
> they will always lag behind the virus writers. And during that lag,
> some systems will get the virus.
>
> Gordon L. Burditt

OK be paranoid
Anonymous
April 26, 2005 5:34:58 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (More info?)

> No, it doesn't. Someone has to get the virus FIRST. It then takes
> time to turn a virus sample into a virus definition and get it into
> the distributed updates. Anti-virus companies may act quickly, but
> they will always lag behind the virus writers. And during that lag,
> some systems will get the virus.

Uh, no. A great many are variants or attempt to use predictably troublesome
behaviors. That's detectable and can be guarded against.
Anonymous
April 26, 2005 5:39:24 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (More info?)

> > Oh it certainly is true.
>
> Of course it's not true. Worse, it's obviously false. And as I've
> already said, I don't have a single peripheral that was built for the
> Mac (except the speakers that came with it, as I've mentioned).

That YOU don't have them, and that you've not chosen them doesn't make it
true. So please, brush up on your logic skills.

> You like "choice." That's fine, but it doesn't persuade me.

Some folks are quite comfortable in their dictated little worlds. The rest
of us like diversity.
Anonymous
April 26, 2005 5:41:29 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (More info?)

> You need to have the choice of hundreds of keyboards instead of only
> d0zens with a Mac? Get Real. I have a Microsoft Wireless Elite Keyboard
> on my G5 tower as I type this.

And you ignore what Apple charges for keyboards compared to what economies
of scale have done for the PC market and, as a result, your own keyboard.
Anonymous
April 26, 2005 5:41:34 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (More info?)

> No, it doesn't. Someone has to get the virus FIRST. It then takes
> time to turn a virus sample into a virus definition and get it into
> the distributed updates. Anti-virus companies may act quickly, but
> they will always lag behind the virus writers. And during that lag,
> some systems will get the virus.
>
> Gordon L. Burditt

Actually, it's also true that many AV programs are beginning to use
heuristics now to sniff out virii and other malware *before* they've
been manually identified. It's an approach that is way past due.

Randy S.
Anonymous
April 26, 2005 5:43:03 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (More info?)

> Nice try. Obviously never used a Mac.

Bzzzt, wrong again. I had my first 128k several months before the public
ever saw one. This also after several Lisa's. I also worked there for a
while. As the saying goes, "if you saw sausages made you'd never eat them
again". Thus my being Mac-free ever since. The facts being that the stuff
is overpriced, lacking in features I need and offering very limited
accessory options only reinforce it. I'm certainly glad some folks find
comfort using them, choice and diversity is a wonderful thing.
Anonymous
April 26, 2005 7:16:18 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (More info?)

In article <m8Cdnd1BMM4b4PPfRVn-iQ@speakeasy.net>, wkearney99
<wkearney99@hotmail.com> wrote:

> > > Oh it certainly is true.
> >
> > Of course it's not true. Worse, it's obviously false. And as I've
> > already said, I don't have a single peripheral that was built for the
> > Mac (except the speakers that came with it, as I've mentioned).
>
> That YOU don't have them, and that you've not chosen them doesn't make it
> true. So please, brush up on your logic skills.

No, *I* don't have them and I don't know of *anyone* who has them.
That's because such peripherals don't exist. As someone else pointed
out, what you said was largely true two or three Mac generations ago.
It's not true now, though, and it hasn't been true for a long time.

You made a statement that was wrong on its face, and you've since
wasted a couple of posts on damage control. And as for logic skills,
when was it that gratuitous insults started passing for logic?

> > You like "choice." That's fine, but it doesn't persuade me.
>
> Some folks are quite comfortable in their dictated little worlds. The rest
> of us like diversity.

I'm as impressed by your notion of "diversity" as I was by your notion
of "choice." You're welcome to both.
Anonymous
April 26, 2005 7:23:29 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (More info?)

In article <kZadnQb7UJY64PPfRVn-1g@speakeasy.net>, wkearney99
<wkearney99@hotmail.com> wrote:

> > You need to have the choice of hundreds of keyboards instead of only
> > d0zens with a Mac? Get Real. I have a Microsoft Wireless Elite Keyboard
> > on my G5 tower as I type this.
>
> And you ignore what Apple charges for keyboards compared to what economies
> of scale have done for the PC market and, as a result, your own keyboard.


Didn't he just say that he uses a non-Apple keyboard? What does
Apple's pricing structure have to do with it?

What he's saying is that his non-Apple keyboard works with his G5. My
point exactly.
Anonymous
April 27, 2005 5:06:10 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (More info?)

On Sun, 24 Apr 2005 at 19:22 GMT, <wevsr@nabs.net> wrote:

> Jack Zwick (jzwick3@mindspring.com) wrote in alt.video.ptv.tivo:
>> You'd rather have a Doom Game machine than a reliable computer?
>
> Define "reliable".

Constant use and uptime values > 365 days?

> Other than needing to reboot for some software installs, there's nothing

That's so evil, IMO. It really should be necessary to reboot except
when changing out essential chunks of the OS, or hardware.

--
http://cbsrmt.mousetrap.net/RMTdb/ CBS Radio Mystery Theater database
CBSRMT uploads each day in <news:alt.binaries.sounds.radio.cbsrmt>
http://greyhound.mousetrap.net/altus/ our ex-racer greyhound
http://www.mousetrap.net/~mouse/cs.html How to get good phone support
Anonymous
April 27, 2005 5:06:11 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (More info?)

>>Other than needing to reboot for some software installs, there's nothing
>
>
> That's so evil, IMO. It really should be necessary to reboot except
> when changing out essential chunks of the OS, or hardware.
>

For clients, it's really not that big a deal. For servers, I absolutely
agree with you. I've noticed that MS seems to be waking up to this
quite a bit lately. I've done a few patches recently where it
instructed me to stop some service or other so that it wouldn't need to
reboot post-patch.

Randy S.
Anonymous
April 28, 2005 11:45:01 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (More info?)

> You made a statement that was wrong on its face, and you've since
> wasted a couple of posts on damage control. And as for logic skills,
> when was it that gratuitous insults started passing for logic?

Oh please, spare me your attempts at being even more arrogant than usual.
Anonymous
April 29, 2005 2:48:31 AM

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (More info?)

In article <ytmdneTzfOfj6OzfRVn-iQ@speakeasy.net>, wkearney99
<wkearney99@hotmail.com> wrote:

> > You made a statement that was wrong on its face, and you've since
> > wasted a couple of posts on damage control. And as for logic skills,
> > when was it that gratuitous insults started passing for logic?
>
> Oh please, spare me your attempts at being even more arrogant than usual.


That makes my point quite nicely. Thanks.
!