lishka@uwslh.UUCP (Fish-Guts) (10/03/88)
In article <7437@gryphon.CTS.COM> jdow@gryphon.CTS.COM (J. Dow) writes: >In article <386@uwslh.UUCP> lishka@uwslh.UUCP (Fish-Guts) writes: >> Now, what makes Mr. Pournelle so damned frustrating is that he is >>not *really* a computer professional; instead, he just acts like one. >Dr. Pournelle is indeed not a computer professional. He HAS been using personal >computers (not just PClones) for many years now. He IS experienced. (He is the >one of the Niven/Pournelle pair who is more facile with the computers inspite >of Larry injecting most of the abstruse science aspects.) My Father has used "personal computers" for many years now, to the point of where they were taking up a *lot* of his time. My Dad *still* loves CP/M machines, and has just discovered MS/DOS, which he is also beginning to like. He also believes he knows everything about CP/M computers, yet he cannot even program in BASIC or Pascal (or any other language for that matter). However, he has a PhD in Buddhism, and is very bright in other fields. I work for microbiologists in this building who have also used computers for years. While they are certainly bright and inventive in the shell-programming that they do (this is UNIX, BTW), the programs are inefficient, and some of the other non-programming tasks they do are downright silly (e.g. trying to write documents in RAW nroff, without a macro package -- something I wouldn't wish on my worst enemy). However, the microbiologists certainly are amazingly bright in there own areas of expertise (as well as others, of course). My point is that a person can use computers for years and still know relatively little about the "overall computer picture." In the above cases the people's experience is not sufficient to make them "knowledgeable" in other, more general (or specific) computer areas. Mr. Pournelle strikes me as this kind of person. He has been involved in a lot of computer-related activities, and certainly seems to have set up a lot of equipment (or had some guru set it up *for* him), but I do not think he really knows all that much about computers. Like someone else said, he is a "spokesman" for "the rest of the computer users" who have learned computers the hard way, without proper education or even good documentation. I bring this up because I do not believe Mr. Pournelle knows very much about computers in general, or even knows much about computers other than MS/DOS machines (and the other few types that he has used). Yet he makes some pretty far-reaching statements about topics which many times are dead wrong. He needs to know when *not* to say something. Don't get me wrong: I do not think he stupid (rather I think he is bright), he is probably a really nice guy if you know him (and I would enjoy meeting him myself), but he tries to say too much about computers on subjects that he knows very little about (and it shows!). >What you guys are missing here is this was a party. Jerry was NOT the person >trying to use the wheel. He was watching a half dozen of his friends, ME >INCLUDED, use that damn code wheel. In an exciting party setting the delays >and frustrations using that wheel were unsupportable. *I* had trouble using >the fool thing in the ambient lighting. It has all the attractiveness of >three week dead hamsters camped two feet inside your mattress. It just DOES >NOT work. Well, some games are made to be able to play "out-of-the-box" (i.e. arcade games, "joystick-scrubbers," whatever), and some are not. I would say that F18-Interceptor is intended for players who want to spend a little time learning how to use the game; in other words, IMHO it is *not* an "out-of-the-box" flight simulator. This might explain some of the frustrations you had. I think you are right: the code wheel is annoying. However, in general use it isn't all that hard to deal with. I have fiddled with my friend's version of the game, and I found it rather easy to use the wheel. Now, if I were at a party, and had a few beers, I may not do that well (but remember, "drinking and driving an F18 do not mix!" ;-) > (And *I* certainly RESENT the implication that because I cannot make >that stupid wheel work in that party setting I am in some way stupid or dumb or >otherwise less than competant dammit! No no no. I said that Mr. Pournelle and his readers are *NOT* stupid; rather, they are intelligent and bright people (like you and I and everyone else in the world). You are confusing my statements with some others written by someone else. >I'd better cool off. You guys finally got MY goat because in tarring Jerry with >THIS brush you are impunging MY abilities as well. You can just <bleep> off on >THAT one. >{\,/} I'd better cool off myself ;-) I am sorry if you thought I called you stupid...I certainly hoped my messages did not imply this about anyone. I also do not want to "tar" Mr. Pournelle, but I wish he would think twice about printing some of the inacurracies that he does. > jdow@bix (where else?) Sometimes the dragon wins. Sometimes > jdow@gryphon.CTS.COM the knight. Does the fair maiden ever > {backbone}!gryphon!jdow win? Surely both the knight and dragon .oO Chris Oo. -- Christopher Lishka ...!{rutgers|ucbvax|...}!uwvax!uwslh!lishka Wisconsin State Lab of Hygiene lishka%uwslh.uucp@cs.wisc.edu Immunology Section (608)262-1617 lishka@uwslh.uucp ---- "...Just because someone is shy and gets straight A's does not mean they won't put wads of gum in your arm pits." - Lynda Barry, "Ernie Pook's Commeek: Gum of Mystery"
jdow@gryphon.CTS.COM (J. Dow) (10/06/88)
In article <387@uwslh.UUCP> lishka@uwslh.UUCP (Fish-Guts) writes: >In article <7437@gryphon.CTS.COM> jdow@gryphon.CTS.COM (J. Dow) writes: > You are confusing my statements with >some others written by someone else. > >>I'd better cool off. You guys finally got MY goat because in tarring Jerry with >>THIS brush you are impunging MY abilities as well. You can just <bleep> off on >>THAT one. >>{\,/} > > I'd better cool off myself ;-) I am sorry if you thought I called >you stupid...I certainly hoped my messages did not imply this about >anyone. I also do not want to "tar" Mr. Pournelle, but I wish he >would think twice about printing some of the inacurracies that he >does. > What happened was your somewhat benign (in comparison) remarks were more like thestraw that brokee the camel's back - my patience. That code wheel is not all that easy to read under less than ideal conditions. And what party is ever set in ideal code wheel conditions? We meant for the game to be a diversion, not a career. And all Jerry was doing was reporting what happened. I realize what happened was disappointing and unfortunate. EA are the ones deserving of THAT flame, not Jerry. (Look for an interesting column from him in the future. I've seen a galley proof that is reasonably complimentary of his newly upgraded machine complete with 020 card etc... I suspect if people flame him about THAT one the A2000 goes over his balcony railing ASAP. <@_-> He DOES like it. The failings just get in the way...) (Oh - on bix I had a chance to pull a real good dig at the PClone folks and their DV286, DV386, and OS/2 and VM386 debacles. I was told I was being unkind. I remined them that I suffered this for the last few years and just enjoyed getting my return digs in. At least the AMiga TELLS YOU when something dies. The stupid clones just die!) >Christopher Lishka ...!{rutgers|ucbvax|...}!uwvax!uwslh!lishka -- Sometimes a bird in the hand leaves a sticky deposit. Perhaps it were best it remain there in the bush with the other one. {@_@} jdow@bix (where else?) Sometimes the dragon wins. Sometimes jdow@gryphon.CTS.COM the knight. Does the fair maiden ever {backbone}!gryphon!jdow win? Surely both the knight and dragon stink. Maybe the maiden should suicide? Better yet - she should get an Amiga and quit playing with dragons and knights.