Re: [ql-users] New here....
P Witte wrote: I can understand that a qxl.win container file could get fragmented during creation. But do you mean that the container file can get fragmenbted on the Windoze side by file operations on the QL side too? No, once it's in one piece it should stay that way. But then I sometimes make/restore backups and in that case the new file can be fragmented again. But as I said, I don't really see this as a problem anyway. I just recall one instance when I did have to defragment my QXL.WIN drive, and that was after extracting thousands of files on it (SMSQ/E sources) and then making the different directories afterwards. This leads to huge spaces in the directory structures and has a noticeable speed impact. For example the main directory could have looked like this: smsq_1000 smsq_1001 smsq_1002 smsq_1003 [...] 995 more files smsq_1999 Now when I make a make_dir win1_smsq the result is like this deleted entry deleted entry deleted entry deleted entry [...] 995 more deleted entries deleted entry smsq- directory Now every time I requested something out of the smsq_ directory SMSQ/E had to look through 1000 deleted entries to finally find the one with the directory. The morale: create your directories first. Marcel ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] New here....
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Marcel Kilgus [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes Tobias Fröschle wrote: Did I say already that QPC2 is the most enjoyable piece of software I bought in the last couple of years, already? Thanks a lot :-) For the people wondering where the new release is, there are multiple problems currently that have attacked me at once. First my new job, which leaves me with much less time (and even less inclination to continue programming after 8 hours of software development every day), then my main development laptop died some weeks ago and while I wanted to transfer the work to my new company laptop I've been waiting for my Visual Studio licence for that one for 6 weeks now... so everything has stalled a bit, but I'll try to somehow get out a Beta soon. Nice to hear that you are now working for a living ... :-) While I'm writing anyway, some comments to another topic: of course QXL.WIN files can fragment like pretty much all other file systems (some more, some less, but basically all have the problem). But QXL.WIN files are virtual anyway, so even if the data within the drives is not fragmented, the Windows file still can be. Interesting ... And it's all not that much of a problem because a typical QXL.WIN file can usually fit into the whole RAM of a PC nowadays and thus the buffering prevents any bigger performance impact. The only problem there really is if the directories themselves get fragmented. In this case a defragmenting can make sense. As mentioned the only way to defragment a drive is by formating a new one and copying everything over. The easiest way I know for that is using the CueShell application, which can copy entire discs including all sub-directories with two clicks. I guess then that such a feature could be a part of a future version of SMSQ/E ? Yet, arranged in such a way, like the formatting command for a WIN drive, that it is not easy to do inadvertently. This, I suppose, starts to become more relevant as the size of hard drives increases in GB's of storage, and therefore more likely to fragment over a period of time. Windows Vista will no doubt accelerate this trend ... By the way, how large are people creating their WIN drives ? -- Malcolm Cadman ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] New here....
- Original Message - From: Malcolm Cadman [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2007 9:43 PM Subject: Re: [ql-users] New here In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Marcel Kilgus [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes Tobias Fröschle wrote: Did I say already that QPC2 is the most enjoyable piece of software I bought in the last couple of years, already? Thanks a lot :-) For the people wondering where the new release is, there are multiple problems currently that have attacked me at once. First my new job, which leaves me with much less time (and even less inclination to continue programming after 8 hours of software development every day), then my main development laptop died some weeks ago and while I wanted to transfer the work to my new company laptop I've been waiting for my Visual Studio licence for that one for 6 weeks now... so everything has stalled a bit, but I'll try to somehow get out a Beta soon. Nice to hear that you are now working for a living ... :-) While I'm writing anyway, some comments to another topic: of course QXL.WIN files can fragment like pretty much all other file systems (some more, some less, but basically all have the problem). But QXL.WIN files are virtual anyway, so even if the data within the drives is not fragmented, the Windows file still can be. Interesting ... And it's all not that much of a problem because a typical QXL.WIN file can usually fit into the whole RAM of a PC nowadays and thus the buffering prevents any bigger performance impact. The only problem there really is if the directories themselves get fragmented. In this case a defragmenting can make sense. As mentioned the only way to defragment a drive is by formating a new one and copying everything over. The easiest way I know for that is using the CueShell application, which can copy entire discs including all sub-directories with two clicks. I guess then that such a feature could be a part of a future version of SMSQ/E ? Yet, arranged in such a way, like the formatting command for a WIN drive, that it is not easy to do inadvertently. This, I suppose, starts to become more relevant as the size of hard drives increases in GB's of storage, and therefore more likely to fragment over a period of time. Windows Vista will no doubt accelerate this trend ... By the way, how large are people creating their WIN drives ? -- Malcolm Cadman _ When I first started using QXL.win files, I merely reproduced what I had been using on my MASSIVE (then) 1.8 Mb hard drive partitions. That was 7 X 256 Kb + the balance which worked out at about 128 Kb. To make things easy (for me) I stuck them all in one folder (wins) on the PC and named them abc.win, def.win, ghi.win.etc and configured QPC2 such that abc.win is win1_, def.win is win2_ etc. I also have a 6 Kb win file specifically for QWORD dictionaries etc. called (guess what?) qword.win ( isn't that original?) I have never had any problems from these files, fragmented or not and never had need to reformat the space as has been suggested here. I have, however defragged the hard drive that they are on about every three months as a matter of routine. Cheers, John Gilpin. __ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] New here....
The only problem that I have had with qxl.win was when I had a drive (IE: win1_, win2_) space that was nearly full. If I added, deleted or modified too many files it could get very fragmented and suddenly run out of 'room' even though it showed enough left. To solve that I normally would do a copy command (the C68 copy), tell it to include subdirectories, and copy to a different win drive and then copy it back. That would clean it up 100%. I never noticed much top level fragmentation speed impact. I found that if I reserved enough empty space on a drive, I totally avoid the fragmentation issue. Don't know if this has been improved with the SMSQE updates but I haven't hit it for a few years now. jim On Apr 25, 2007, at 7:12 PM, P Witte wrote: Marcel Kilgus writes: While I'm writing anyway, some comments to another topic: of course QXL.WIN files can fragment like pretty much all other file systems (some more, some less, but basically all have the problem). But QXL.WIN files are virtual anyway, so even if the data within the drives is not fragmented, the Windows file still can be. I can understand that a qxl.win container file could get fragmented during creation. But do you mean that the container file can get fragmenbted on the Windoze side by file operations on the QL side too? On the QXL the container files were attributed as system files and, if I understand correctly, were therefore left alone by the defragger. Presumably they didnt fragment Windoze side either as according to the pretty graphs in Defrag, they remain a solid block and in place. Per ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] New here....
At 22:25 21/04/2007, you wrote: Yes 3.01 is an early version - I have been trying to help this user off the list, but I'm darned if I can remember how to get plus4setup to work from win1_ - it looks for its configure files on flp1_ If it is not an egg sucking lesson could you not change drive name in the exe file ? -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 269.5.7/771 - Release Date: 21/04/2007 11:56 ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] New here....
Yes 3.01 is an early version - I have been trying to help this user off the list, but I'm darned if I can remember how to get plus4setup to work from win1_ - it looks for its configure files on flp1_ As I remember, for the plus4 version 3 I have here: Execute text87 select the New command, then ESC to kill that menu. Once in text87 (if it hasn't found its files, it'll revert to defaults) press F3 for the commands, then Config and Parameters. Next, select the (storage:) Text command, then select 'Other' where you can type in something like win1_t87_ or wherever you store your copy. It will then revert to the original menu, where you should select Save Settings and offer the configure_c91 file to the default location. If this was on say flp1_ you should now be able to move it all to win1_t87_ and it will look for its files there - but I suppose it must also patch its own binary somewhere or it wouldn't know where to find configure_c91 in the first place. As I say, this is largely from memory and looking at the manual, so (knowing my brain) there's probably at least one step missing somewhere :-( ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] New here....
Rich Mellor writes: On Sun, 22 Apr 2007 13:17:15 +0100, Dilwyn Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yes 3.01 is an early version - I have been trying to help this user off the list, but I'm darned if I can remember how to get plus4setup to work from win1_ - it looks for its configure files on flp1_ As I remember, for the plus4 version 3 I have here: Execute text87 select the New command, then ESC to kill that menu. Once in text87 (if it hasn't found its files, it'll revert to defaults) press F3 for the commands, then Config and Parameters. Next, select the (storage:) Text command, then select 'Other' where you can type in something like win1_t87_ or wherever you store your copy. It will then revert to the original menu, where you should select Save Settings and offer the configure_c91 file to the default location. If this was on say flp1_ you should now be able to move it all to win1_t87_ and it will look for its files there - but I suppose it must also patch its own binary somewhere or it wouldn't know where to find configure_c91 in the first place. As I say, this is largely from memory and looking at the manual, so (knowing my brain) there's probably at least one step missing somewhere :-( OK thanks - that seems to ring a bell, but it presumes that you have Text 87 on floppy disk in the first place ! Certainly this is the problem here as the user has a laptop without a floppy disk !! I would have thought that the WIN_USE flp workaround might have been helpful, but that doesnt seem to work on QPC2 V3.33: WIN_USE ram: DIR ram1_ displays the directory of win1_ but WIN_USE flp: DIR flp1_ just returns Not found. Even WIN_USE rat: DIR rat1_ works fine! Is this an error? (I dont normally have an flp attached to my laptop either (USB ones can be had for under £20, though)) Per ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] New here....
Rich Mellor schrieb: On Sun, 22 Apr 2007 15:46:45 +0100, Tobias Fröschle [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I observed the same thing with QPC 3.33: (Got no floppy drive on my laptop as well) copy xxx_exe ram1_ flp_use ram ex flp1_xxx_exe --- Not found copy win1_xxx_exe to flp1_test creates a file win1_flp1_test Looks like a bug to me. Tobias No - yours is not a bug. flp_use ram oops: I actually meant to say ram_use flp, sorry. Totally confused by all this aliasing stuff already Tobias Makes DIR ram1_ try to access flp1_ What you are trying to achieve should be done by RAM_USE flp However, looking at Per's example - there is a reason for his not working as well. The problem is down to the order in which device drivers work. WIN_USE flp: DIR flp1_ will still try to access flp1_ as will RAM_USE flp: DIR flp1_ You need to first of all rename the floppy device driver FLP_USE rat:WIN_USE flp:DIR flp1_ will give you what you want Rich ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] New here....
I've just tried my copy - the version shown on the opening screen (top left) is Text 87 Plus 4 v3 (C) 1992 Software 87 Seems my version is way older (I can only see the version in the binary) - It's 3.01 Looks like that may be the problem. If it's a Text87 original, might be worth asking Jochen Merz or Q-Branch for an upgrade (don't know how much it costs). I think the patches published for Text 87 don't work with version 3 copies. -- Dilwyn Jones ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] New here....
Dilwyn Jones schrieb: I've just tried my copy - the version shown on the opening screen (top left) is Text 87 Plus 4 v3 (C) 1992 Software 87 Seems my version is way older (I can only see the version in the binary) - It's 3.01 This only works if QPC2 is started in mode 4, with a screen size of 512x256. In any other screen size it just gives an empty black screen. That's what I get (even in 512x256) Two suggestions: 1. Older versions of Text87 may not work at all on QPC2 Looks like that 2. If QPC2 starts in any other screen resolution, and you change it down to 512x256 with, say, a DISP_SIZE 512,256 command, this may not work since IIRC memory organisation is not necessarily the same as a standard QL. QPC2 has to be set at 512x256 when it starts (i.e. from the opening setup screen - QPC2 must not be allowed to go into any other resolution before using Text87.) I tried both ways (i.e. starting up with 512x256 as well as changing after start) Neither gives me anything different than a blank black screen. There is a QPC2 facility called QPC_QLSCREMU which sets a kind of automatic QL screen emulation, where the original QL screen is set up in memory and a background job copies whatever is written to the QL screen to the top left corner of the larger QPC2 screen. It works well with some games, for example, which write direct to the QL screen. QPC_QLSCREMU needs a numeric parameter, described on page 8 of the QPC manual, but briefly: QPC_QLSCREMU -1 automatic mode QPC_QLSCREMU 0 screen emulation disabled (default value) QPC_QLSCREMU 4 force to 4-colour (mode 4) QPC_QLSCREMU 8 force to 8-colour (mode 8) None of hose seem to cure my problem QPC2 has lots of these little extra features which I always find useful. Another one I always found useful was QPC_SYNCSCRAP which synchronised text on the QMenu Scrap and Windows Clipboard. If you use an editor like QD which knows how to handle Scrap, this is a quick and easy way to cut and paste short texts to or from Windows. Think I gonna be saying good-bye to Text87. Thanks for the help, anyway Tobias ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] New here....
Marcel Kilgus schrieb: Tobias Fröschle wrote: What I'm basically interested in right now is how I can revive my old collection of software, most importantly Text87, which is by far the most expensive piece of my software collection. It just doesn't seem to like the QPC. Any hints on that, maybe? Some have already wrote it, but if you have Text87plus4 it should already work fine if you start QPC in QL colour mode (try 512x256 if it still doesn't work). For high colour mode there is a patch available against a small fee (12 EUR from JMS). For this I basically had to rewrite the whole graphics output routines of Text87 and patch them into the original EXE file, which was quite a pain really... tried it, doesn't work (recon, Text87's config, does work indeed in 512x256). Thanks for the tip, anyway. Did I say already that QPC2 is the most enjoyable piece of software I bought in the last couple of years, already? Tobias ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] New here....
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 P Witte wrote: Robert Newson writes: P Witte wrote: ... I have serious doubts whether modern, CD-ROM based systems could keep the data for so long. I would never use CDs or DVDs for long-term storage of important data. CDs and DVDs are the medium of the day (as were microdrives and floppies in their day). Round the next corner are HD and Blu-ray, perhaps, so then we'll have to copy all our important data once again. Wasn't there a report [fairly] recently about writeable CDs becoming unreadable after a while, the time also dependent upon method of labelling said CD? see, eg: http://searchwincomputing.techtarget.com/tip/0,289483,sid68_gci1157306,00.html http://www.postgazette.com/pg/04127/311683.stm http://photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00EoLc No one knows how long CD/DVDs will really last. Guestimates range from two to 100 years, depending on the quality of media, the recorder, how they are recorded, how handled, labelled and stored (and who you want to believe). And this is exactly my point: To be sure, important data should always be backed up to the medium of the day. But this is not enough, as there are more serious threats to precious data: Obsolescence; ie not being able to read the disk due to no longer having a compatible device to read the medium, or being able to find or to run the software required to interpret the data. There are two relevant points here. To listen to the court transcripts of the Nelson Mandela trial, a repro reader had to be made. The British Library still keep their paper archives. They do use media of the day as Per put it, but cannot keep up to date as they do not have resources to keep it on current media. I reckon historians in a few hundred years will have less data for current times (proportionally) for certain things than we do for 200 years ago. Letters for instance have been a major source of historical data. Can you imagine emails being saved for 100 years let alone read? Also paper is a very tolerant media. Damaged tape/CDs etc are very very difficult to restore and require a high degree of current technical knowledge. Also if the data degrades to any degree overall, recovery is probably impossible. Data on paper is very much easier. It is much more likely to be recoverable after fire/flood, and if the ink fades, or the paper tears. It is also future proof. Eyes and brain probably won't change that much! When I sold the QL Telepen barcoder, I included a program to print out data in barcode form. I don't suppose this was used by anyone, but I bet would have lasted better than the average microdrive! Tony - -- QBBS (QL fido BBS 2:257/67) +44(0)1442-828255 [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://firshman.co.uk Voice: +44(0)1442-828254 Fax: +44(0)1442-828255 Skype: tonyfirshman TF Services, 29 Longfield Road, TRING, Herts, HP23 4DG -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFGJxM6M3RzOs8+btoRAs0EAKCOLtMRvUA/U/N0JQVQDwpOCXjdCQCgiHTq ujv7MQgNUlSV1X48tpjCPuE= =NRmL -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] New here....
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], P Witte [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes Clip Oh well, just backup your entire disk then, they will say. The problem is that by doing that you also back up a whole heap of totally unnecessary stuff, thereby creating extra work for you and a logistical nightmare, as each unnecessary KB of data you back up eats up your time, money and patience, and increases the chances of error, loosing stuff, missing stuff or just not bothering. In other words, if you take your data seriously you cannot leave it to anyone else to keep it safe and accessible. You are right ... you have to make backups of the important - to you - stuff, which is the data files, not the application programmes. I have just done this with data documents on one CD and digital images on another CD. All relatively painless to do. How long will the CD's last ? ... Well who really cares, as we are always shuffling data storage from one medium to another. As long as we have the means to do so, then we remain in charge. -- Malcolm Cadman ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] New here....
What I'm basically interested in right now is how I can revive my old collection of software, most importantly Text87, which is by far the most expensive piece of my software collection. It just doesn't seem to like the QPC. Any hints on that, maybe? This is one of the things I cant help with, as Im not a Text87 user. However, help is on its way, as this is a question that has been asked here a number of times before and, as far as Im aware, has been largely resolved. As its something thats been on my mind recently, there is one piece of advice I have for someone in your situation: While you have your QL up and running, if you havent already done so, backup any old microdrives and floppies to hard disk and CD/DVD as soon as possible! Per, backing up and securing all that I could find was one of the first things I did when browsing through the stuff found. I must admit that I was amazed how many of the disks were still perfectly readable after more than 10 years of gathering dust on the shelf (Only the cheaper disks found were unreadable, .fortunately I had all my important back-ups on high-quality disks. I have serious doubts whether modern, CD-ROM based systems could keep the data for so long. I would never use CDs or DVDs for long-term storage of important data. Tobias ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] New here....
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: As its something thats been on my mind recently, there is one piece of advice I have for someone in your situation: While you have your QL up and running, if you havent already done so, backup any old microdrives and floppies to hard disk and CD/DVD as soon as possible! Per, backing up and securing all that I could find was one of the first things I did when browsing through the stuff found. I must admit that I was amazed how many of the disks were still perfectly readable after more than 10 years of gathering dust on the shelf (Only the cheaper disks found were unreadable, .fortunately I had all my important back-ups on high-quality disks. Of course you did! ;-) I have serious doubts whether modern, CD-ROM based systems could keep the data for so long. I would never use CDs or DVDs for long-term storage of important data. CDs and DVDs are the medium of the day (as were microdrives and floppies in their day). Round the next corner are HD and Blu-ray, perhaps, so then we'll have to copy all our important data once again. Im not sure I could commit to moving all my stuff onto an internet based data warehouse, as a number of pundits advise, both for reasons of reliability and security as well as privacy. Has anyone any idea about the longevity of flash ROM? At least for our QL-generated data we have the advantage that the size of that data is comparatively small (except in Dilwyn's case (http://www.dilwyn.uk6.net/index.html), of course ;o) However, the greatest danger to our data is the obsolescence of the hardware/software to run the software to properly access the data! Most of my most importnt personal data is still generated on the QL, as I reckon I have more control that way. Per ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] New here....
In a message dated 17/04/2007 23:34:07 GMT Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: What I'm basically interested in right now is how I can revive my old collection of software, most importantly Text87, which is by far the most expensive piece of my software collection. It just doesn't seem to like the QPC. Any hints on that, maybe? Hi If the problem with text87 is the GD2 colour drivers which I think it will be if your version of QPC2 is upto date (QPC 3.33 SMSQ/E 3.13) you will need to buy the text87 patch program to update it for the GD2 colour drivers. JMS software QBranch sell it I think. Once you have patched it to run on QPC2 there is a freeware patch for the patched version of Text87 to give a wider range of paper ink colour options. On Dilwyn Jones site. Duncan ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] New here....
I just recently browsed ye olde this' and thats in the basement and came across a box of my old QL stuff buried under 10 years of dust. I couldn't stand it for long and now he's back on the desk again: Sinclair QL, basically brand new (has been bought at that time as an occasion for next to nothing just in case), MGG, Sandy Q-Board and, after browsing the internet for what might have been left over from the QL community, now accompanied by a brand new QPC installation on my laptop. Still lurking in the box is a Miracle QXL board, which has long lost its fellow PC with the ISA slots. Let's see if I can find a new replacement. The beauty of a QXL is that it should work in any old PC with an ISA slot. And runs pretty independent of the PC's processor speed. So that old PC that is no good as a PC can be set up to be a decent QL system - it just needs some element of DOS. Please be warned: I might possibly pester you with questions on what has changed during my 10 years absence from the scene during the next weeks or so. That's the kind of thing we're good at here! Feel free. What I'm basically interested in right now is how I can revive my old collection of software, most importantly Text87, which is by far the most expensive piece of my software collection. It just doesn't seem to like the QPC. Any hints on that, maybe? Text87 needs a patch program for running on recent versions of the QL OS. You can get from Q-Branch in England or from Jochen Merz in Germany. I'm not sure: Text 87 might work on QPC if you boot it up into 4 colour mode with a resolution of 512x256. A lot of older programs which have trouble with higher resolution or higher colour levels will work better if you do this. -- Dilwyn Jones ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] New here....
Tobias Fröschle wrote: What I'm basically interested in right now is how I can revive my old collection of software, most importantly Text87, which is by far the most expensive piece of my software collection. It just doesn't seem to like the QPC. Any hints on that, maybe? Some have already wrote it, but if you have Text87plus4 it should already work fine if you start QPC in QL colour mode (try 512x256 if it still doesn't work). For high colour mode there is a patch available against a small fee (12 EUR from JMS). For this I basically had to rewrite the whole graphics output routines of Text87 and patch them into the original EXE file, which was quite a pain really... Marcel ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] New here....
P Witte wrote: ... I have serious doubts whether modern, CD-ROM based systems could keep the data for so long. I would never use CDs or DVDs for long-term storage of important data. CDs and DVDs are the medium of the day (as were microdrives and floppies in their day). Round the next corner are HD and Blu-ray, perhaps, so then we'll have to copy all our important data once again. Wasn't there a report [fairly] recently about writeable CDs becoming unreadable after a while, the time also dependent upon method of labelling said CD? see, eg: http://searchwincomputing.techtarget.com/tip/0,289483,sid68_gci1157306,00.html http://www.postgazette.com/pg/04127/311683.stm http://photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00EoLc ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] New here....
Robert Newson writes: P Witte wrote: ... I have serious doubts whether modern, CD-ROM based systems could keep the data for so long. I would never use CDs or DVDs for long-term storage of important data. CDs and DVDs are the medium of the day (as were microdrives and floppies in their day). Round the next corner are HD and Blu-ray, perhaps, so then we'll have to copy all our important data once again. Wasn't there a report [fairly] recently about writeable CDs becoming unreadable after a while, the time also dependent upon method of labelling said CD? see, eg: http://searchwincomputing.techtarget.com/tip/0,289483,sid68_gci1157306,00.html http://www.postgazette.com/pg/04127/311683.stm http://photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00EoLc No one knows how long CD/DVDs will really last. Guestimates range from two to 100 years, depending on the quality of media, the recorder, how they are recorded, how handled, labelled and stored (and who you want to believe). And this is exactly my point: To be sure, important data should always be backed up to the medium of the day. But this is not enough, as there are more serious threats to precious data: Obsolescence; ie not being able to read the disk due to no longer having a compatible device to read the medium, or being able to find or to run the software required to interpret the data. I had a Psion S3 pocket computer for some years. And although I conscientiously backed up the data to my QL (via QTPI and some home-grown programs) much of it can no longer be read as the device (the Psion S3) no longer works and therefore also not the applications used to create and read the data. Serendipitously, with uncharacteristic (and commendable ;-) prescience I also made backups in export format (ie either in plaintext or comma delimited plaintext data) so that, apart from any formatting, the data itself is mostly still intact. (The thought of Unicode becoming standard still freaks me, though!) The programs I wrote for this machine are, of course obsolete and useless. Changes to file formats is another worrying problem. M$ Orifice changes its file formats approximately every other major release. Provided you stay with the M$ bandwagon and keep upgrading regularly, it shouldnt be too difficult to keep reading your old files. But it is not unlikely that you may find that files produced with less mainstream programs may no longer be readable by a later version of the same program 10 years hence. M$ is releasing a new picture format that they hope will replace the now so familiar jpeg format. No doubt we will all jump on that bandwagon eventually, as the technological advantages will prove too alluring in the long run (and you will be struggling against the grain to use any other format anyway). For a while we will keep our eye on the ball and not worry about our old photos and stuff. But then we will either have to convert all the old stuff to the new format (perhaps loosing the original file date information etc on the way) or find that we have to purchase or write converters for them (if we can still find an old fashioned Ultra Blu-ray drive to read the disks).. M$ dont care about your personal data, otherwise they would have thought about it when they designed their OS. But they didnt, did they? Why else would they hide your vital correspondence behind two sets of hidden folders deep down in the system partition of your disk? (Outlook's proprietary data file containing emails, agendas etc, resides at %system%:\Documents and Settings\username\Local Settings\Application Data\Microsoft\Outlook\outlook.pst) Oh well, just backup your entire disk then, they will say. The problem is that by doing that you also back up a whole heap of totally unnecessary stuff, thereby creating extra work for you and a logistical nightmare, as each unnecessary KB of data you back up eats up your time, money and patience, and increases the chances of error, loosing stuff, missing stuff or just not bothering. In other words, if you take your data seriously you cannot leave it to anyone else to keep it safe and accessible. Per ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
[ql-users] New here....
Gents, (Ladies?) I just recently joined the list and wanted to shortly introduce myself... I just recently browsed ye olde this' and thats in the basement and came across a box of my old QL stuff buried under 10 years of dust. I couldn't stand it for long and now he's back on the desk again: Sinclair QL, basically brand new (has been bought at that time as an occasion for next to nothing just in case), MGG, Sandy Q-Board and, after browsing the internet for what might have been left over from the QL community, now accompanied by a brand new QPC installation on my laptop. Still lurking in the box is a Miracle QXL board, which has long lost its fellow PC with the ISA slots. Let's see if I can find a new replacement. Please be warned: I might possibly pester you with questions on what has changed during my 10 years absence from the scene during the next weeks or so. Something about my background: I earn a living from daily juggling with real computers with a big scandinavian mobile phone company (no, the other one) in Germany. When I used to be an active QL-er i was mainly interested in programming in 68k assembler and C, mostly for the pointer interface which was, as far as I remember, pretty new to the scene back then (One of my last software purchases for the QL was QPAC2, which was brand-new at that time) What I'm basically interested in right now is how I can revive my old collection of software, most importantly Text87, which is by far the most expensive piece of my software collection. It just doesn't seem to like the QPC. Any hints on that, maybe? Thanks Tobias ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
