TiVo OS is not PNP

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
57 answers Last reply
More about tivo pnp
  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. 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.
  6. 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?
  7. 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
  8. 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.jpg
  9. 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
  10. 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.
  11. 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
  12. 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."
  13. 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.
  14. 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.
  15. 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
  16. 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.
  17. 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/MailerDaemon.gif
  18. 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.
  19. 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.
  20. 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.
  21. 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?
  22. 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.
  23. 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.jpg
  24. 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.
  25. 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.
  26. 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.gif
  27. 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.
  28. 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.
  29. 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.
  30. 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.
  31. 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.
  32. 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.
  33. 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.
  34. 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.
  35. 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.
  36. 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
  37. 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.
  38. 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
  39. 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.
  40. 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.
  41. 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.
  42. 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.
  43. 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.
  44. 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.
  45. 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.
  46. 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
  47. 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.
  48. 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.
  49. 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.
Ask a new question

Read More

Ptv Tivo Tivo Video