User talk:Guy Harris

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from User:Guy Harris)
Jump to: navigation, search

(Sorry, this welcome is way, way, way overdue. But better now than later)


Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using three tildes, like this: ~~~. Four tildes (~~~~) produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome!

Zzyzx11 | Talk 01:35, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)



Thanks for the SNAP explanation! The Provan link is also very helpful! Funkyj 19:18, 7 December 2005 (UTC)


Hi Guy Harris, I've seen that you are pretty much involved into the packet analyzer section (and related topics). May be you could give your opinion about netsniff-ng. There is a discussion about deletion (see history). This would be great. Thanks. Netcrash87 (talk) 13:19, 21 November 2009 (UTC)


Hi. I've noticed you're rather good with compsci-related articles. If you could please help with the current discussion on the framebuffer article, I'd be very grateful. Thanks! StuartBrady 14:28, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

Hebrew[edit] Maybe should be changed also?

Yes. Done. Guy Harris 20:13, 15 January 2006 (UTC)


I have been looking through the list of unwatched pages (available only to administrators) and found 31-bit. I see that you recently edited this but are not watching it. You may want to go to your preferences and under the "editing" tab turn on "Add pages you edit to your watchlist". This will enable you to keep an eye out for any edits that are made to pages you work on and help to revert vandalism. If you do decide to turn it on can you please drop me a note on my talk page so I can cut down my excessive watchlist (6000+). Thanks. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 18:39, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

CPU article and the ABC vandal[edit]

Hey Guy, I just wanted to drop a cautionary line warning you to be careful of violating the WP:3RR in reverting the CPU article. You wouldn't want to get yourself blocked over a silly vandal that we all realize is spouting BS. If you're up to your maximum number of reverts for a day, just wait for another editor (like myself) to remove the text. I've listed this guy on WP:VIP, so some vandalism fighters will be watching him (one of his IPs has already been short-term blocked). He'll likely either soon lose interest in the articles here or become persistant enough to be labeled a long-term alert vandal. Thanks for helping maintain the integrity of CPU, just make sure to cover your own posterior in the process! -- uberpenguin 05:19, 6 March 2006 (UTC)


I just thought I should mention to someone: about the file format info boxes. Creator code and ostype are two different Mac OS concepts. It is not correct to replace one with the other. Vendor independent file types won't have a standard creator code, while the creator code for vendor specific file types exists, but will (so far as I know) never be the same as the ostype. I'd rather not get involved in the project to do these boxes, but I did want to get this to those working on it. I'll only correct the pages I'm watching. Notinasnaid 07:47, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

file colors by type[edit]

(→Behaviour - Move the color "ls" example here from the "file (Unix)" page - it has nothing whatsoever to do with the "file" command.)

Guy, the 'ls' command uses the file's type to determine the color. The file command shows the file's type. So it is completely relevent to the file article. I wish you would put it back. --Unixguy 14:00, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

watch the coppyright stuff...[edit]

It looks like most of your addition to Vinod Dham's article is taken directly (cut/paste) from the source that you also added. Jabencarsey 22:46, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Err, umm, no, it doesn't look like that at all. What I added was stuff not from the article, replacing some stuff from the article. When looking up some stuff about Dham, I found the article, and put the "Copyright violation?" item in the discussion page. Guy Harris 01:23, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

ok... i think i got you and guy before you confused on the history...NM Jabencarsey 06:10, 6 July 2006 (UTC)


I didn't know that risc compilers ignored it too. So what's the point of the language feature (I used to teach C++ and some people wanted to know) --matador300 23:55, 21 July 2006 (UTC)


I'll let it sit, but the point is that the number of general purpose accumulators is small on the PDP-8 and HP 2100. The 8086 really only has AX and BX, the other registers are usually busy doing particular other things. The Power PC register assignent is pretty much determined by the compiler, as it was on the PDP-11 rather than fixed by the register names, or at least that's my understanding. No register is called SP as it is on the x86, though neither 2100 or PDP-8, or MV/8000 for that matter had formal stack registers at all. If you want to get my POV, I like to point out where old, primitive things often succeed over supposedly more elegant things, as is the case with the x86, or in the more extreme case, pointing out parallels with the even more primitive PDP-8. As I pointed out, its the fixed small number of accumulators that most marks the x86 has having a primitive design philosiphy, every RISC machine has a bunch of rN registers, though every one has failed to replace the x86 on anything bigger than a pocket PC. I'll have another look at the I-32, are you an expert or something? I'm just a PC -> windows programmer. --matador300 00:03, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

X86 architecture cleanup[edit]

Thanks for your work on the X86 architecture and following up on my edits. Two heads are better than one! Dealing with the mixture of past and present tense is a challenge. I'm trying to move most wording to the present, but I'm not sure its always the best approach. Keep an eye out for important facts that I may have overlooked and dropped in the processes of streamlining things. Anyway, thanks again. JonHarder 15:56, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Core 2 Duo[edit]

Laptop chip Merom is officially out ([1], [2], etc). For some reason the listing for it points to the same page as for Conroe, and that page specifically includes the word "desktop". But it's been officially launched, as per the press release. The pages that indicated as such were correct.

Now actual availability is of course another matter entirely. Aluvus 18:13, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Power Architecture[edit]

Glad you could join me! Thanks for the editing, corrections and other stuff! -- Henriok 20:35, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

I'm just shaking things up in older articles. Thanks for following up and correcting things! -- Henriok 18:29, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

You are correct.. PowerPC-AS is used in Power4 and later. I actually state as much in the POWERx section, but why I didn't say so in the section about PowerPC-AS is beyond me. I will correct it. Thanks! -- Henriok 08:08, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Would you mind tanking a peek at User:Henriok/PowerPC 600 for me? I'm suggesting a major overhaul of this section. It's been sorely lacking attention the last copuple of years and I think it'd be a good idea to make a collective article instead of making a lot of small stubs.. It'll be in the same style as the G3, G4 and 970 articles are, and the PowerQUICC stub that will be my next project. Thanks in advance -- Henriok 17:01, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

They do certainly differ technically but they could be grouped together in a historic perspective, just as I've done with the PowerPC 400 family. Since these processors are of yeasteryear, I don't think that the technical similarities or differences are the main thing, but the historical. Even though one might fill long articles with intricate details about either chip, I'm not the one who's prepared to write those articles, and this is the best I can do.. If I don't do something, I'd be surprised if anyone did anything. As it stands now, the separate articles are in a pitiful state. Time is not our friend here, and soon there will be hard to find any information about these processors. And besides that.. they do share the name for some reason. -- Henriok 10:58, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Hi, it's me again. I'm hoping to get your input about just overwriting the Power Architecture article with my enhanced version, currently sitting at User:Henriok/Power_Architecture. I forked it in November when Mr. crapped all over it. My intention was to keep my version current with all sensible edits to the regular page until I was ready to merge the articles again. I think Im ready. What do you think? Any suggestions? -- Henriok 13:44, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the comments. I've adressed them all but the one that's about POWER4 and PowerPC-AS. the way I understand it, the PowerPC 2.00 spec that was introduced with POWER4 included PowerPC-AS and the POWER3 architecture. The POWER4 unified and replaced PowerPC-AS and POWER3 both as ISAs and implementations (RS64 family and POWER3). Does this make sense? This unified architecture evolved with the POWER5 (v.2.01 and 2.02) and later became the Power ISA v.2.03 Book III-S.
Regarding access dates. I'm sure I didn't have them originally and I must have missed them when they were added to the other page. When I now included the access dates, I also added the original signed dates on the documents. -- Henriok 22:00, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

"It may have included the public part of PowerPC-AS, but there are other things that, as far as I know, IBM doesn't make public - they reserve it for IBM System i"

I see your point, but was this a part of the PowerPC-AS ISA or was it custom instructions that just happen to be part of the RS64-series processors ans probably also POWER4/5 and so on? Those instructions is not part of the Power Architecture per se, just like the SPE ISA and QUICC ISA isn't a part, even if the Cell and PowerQUICC processors are. VMX wasn't a part of Power Architecture until just recently. I'm sure that there are a lot of custom instructions in Gekko, Broadway and Xenon that isn't a part of Power Architecture, and there will certainly be a lot that's not exactly Power in POWER6 since it supposedly should incorporate much of the z/Architecture. Does this make sense? If you think I should clarify things, in what way do you want to make changes? -- Henriok 19:18, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

March 2014[edit]

I addressed the questions you had in my Talk page. -- Henriok (talk) 08:31, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

Solaris extended file attributes[edit]

I've taken the WP:BOLD guideline to the limit (me changing something Guy Harris wrote about Sun software?) by revising Extended file attributes#Solaris. I hope you're happy with my version; if not, please have another go at the article. Cheers, CWC(talk) 21:44, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Unix creator[edit]

Thanks for such a good reply on the talk page - very thorough. I'll continue to monitor, see if we can reach a concensus on how the article should look. --Oscarthecat 20:02, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

List of IBM Products, 701, ... citations[edit]

Thanks for the help on these. I'm new, or a slow learner, or both. Adding details to other articles, it seemed that editors would move external links to the "external links" section, where they were out of context and generally usless (unlikly to be found by the reader at the instant the reader was reading the related text. "Cites" were recommended instead. So to add a link pointing to the most basic source, the IBM archive, I used the cite in what you correctly described as a weird way

{{cite web | title = IBM 123 | url= http:ibmarchive....}}

You wrote that these weren't really citations - I'm not sure about that; they would seem to meet the wiki definition "A citation or bibliographic citation is a reference to a book, article, web page, or other published item with sufficient details to uniquely identify the item". After reading your comment, though, and reading about citation formats, it seems that what I should have done is:

IBM 123 {{cite web | title=IBM Archive | url = http:ibmarchive...}}

Question: If I had coded the IBM 701 that way, would you still have thought it necessary to remove it and create the External Links section? (btw, the 701 got that coding because, given a wiki link in "List of IBM...", I couldn't use my weird style there)

In the "List of IBM Products", however, you converted my weird cites to external links - which other editors don't like in the body of an article. My assumption is that, should I continue, I should make similar additions in the style you used.

There are more interesting concerns, however, with the "List of IBM Products"; I made an entry in the article discussion -- which has had no responses thus far. The article's 2nd paragraph, which I added and you improved (thanks again), is not the way to go, Instead of saying what is not there, it should say what is there -- and that might change the name of the article, if nothing else to "A list of some IBM products"!

Listing all IBM products in one list is not viable, there are too many. And listing all software together, even if it could be done, it would not meet readers needs. The list of IBM Products should be broken into multiple lists.

Software should be listed by machine type or series. For example: IBM 650 software is unique to that machine and should be listed as part of that article or an "IBM 650 Software" article. On the other hand, 1401 software, much of it compatible across the 1400 series, can be listed with the series, not with the individual machines.

Machines with 3 digit numbers, such as IBM 407, would make a useful division, essentially "1900-1959". Even though some of those were used with later machines (e.g. the IBM 1401 could use 729 tape drives). Few things in real life being exact, the early "named" calculators would also belong in this list. Even the AN/FSQ7.

Beginning with the 1960s, separate architectures should have their own list. There is no benefit, for example, in mixing the IBM PC and System/360 in the same list.

And non-data processing stuff: Time clocks, coffee grinders, ..., should have their own list, or lists.

thanks again for all the help (and without saying what you might have thought about me!), 04:51, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

List of IBM Products, ... (more)[edit]

Just for fun, I listed ALMOST all of the 1400 series software provided by IBM! Check it out, IBM 1400 series#References. 20:09, 24 September 2006 (UTC)


The 1460 already there was

  • IBM 1460 — Almost twice as fast as the 1401; 1963

That's in a list of computers.

The 1460 to be added is the 1460 processing unit. Not the same thing at all.

Same problem for the IBM 650 System, its 3 components are

    650 console unit
    655 power supply
    card read punch 533 or 537

The list of IBM Products includes the 650 System, but not the 650 console unit.

Ah, I've been assuming the list should not have entries where the number is duplicated. No reason why we can't duplicate numbers, just need text at the front to let readers know (so that they know to click "find next" sometimes).

But, ..... Looking at newer computer "products" in the List of Products, IBM PC, Thinkpads, e series, there is just one entry; detail component lists, if any, are elsewhere. We should do the same thing for the older computers. Some components would be repeated for different computers, 729s, for example, but that's not a problem.

If anyone thought a list of every component was really important, they could set up templates for Computer system and for computer component, then a bot could assemble the list. (That would have a better result than the current system since only obsessive/compulsive people like myself add components to the current list!)

thanks, 14:20, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

The 7750 was a communications control unit. Also, move the references section to the end, where it usually appears.)[edit]

References not at end - not my first dumb mistake; I forget with wiki that I'm editing only part of a document so not the first time I've added references at the end of a section. Sorry, I'll try to be more careful.

My recollection of the 7750 was that it not a control unit - I think of control units as components of systems - but that it was a stand alone computer in its own right. That's why I left it to be determined. This reference "specialized telecommunications computer, the IBM 7750." is from THis article "" refers to it as "7750 Programmed Transmission Control Unit" - so it might be both stand alone and component. Fine. 21:50, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[edit]

The article "Herman Hollerith" just had a deletion of text where this web site is listed in the "edit summary". Turns out that both the "Herman Hollerith" and the "Thomas J. Watson" articles have lots of text from that web site. Looking at "Home" for that site, it seems likely that the material there has been published in "A DANCE THROUGH THE FIRES OF TIME". And, last, there are several edits of the "Herman Hollerith" site made by futureobservatory.

btw: After seeing the Hollerith deletion and reading the futureobservatory site, I only happened to go to the Watson site - I wasn't searching for copied text. So there may be more sites with futureobservatory text.

Wikipedia ok with all this? tooold 06:01, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

System or IBM System ?[edit]

Looking at the "IBM hardware" category, most article titles begin "IBM", but not all. In the case of "System", it would seem that IBM consistently prefixes "IBM", see [3]. Posssibly within the community of IBM users we drop the "IBM" as unnecessary, but in the larger community of Wikipedia it might be best to be consistent, always using the "IBM" prefix. Want to rename the "System" articles to "IBM System"? (Would also be reasonable if all the hardware articles began "IBM")

There are a lot of articles with "System" in their name; consistent use of "IBM" would help both those looking for IBM articles and those not. tooold 08:34, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Contents Box[edit]

Some articles (my guess is older ones) are missing Content boxes. Is there a way to fix this? Luis F. Gonzalez 19:30, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Disk sharing[edit]


Thanks for your improvements to the "shared resource"/"Shared file access"/"Disk sharing" article that I created! Strange that this has not existed before. (I have addressed the redirect problems you mentioned on my discussion page. THanks for point it out.)

DoD model or TCP/IP reference model[edit]

I teach TCP/IP networking, and in the books we use the four or five layer TCP/IP reference model is called the TCP/IP model. Especially outside U.S., calling it the "DoD model" would not be appreciated. The TCP/IP model is redirected to the Internet protocol suite article.

/Magnus, Sweden


Hi! I did not realize that Ethereal had been renamed Wireshark when I edited the article. I merged both entries in Pcap#Some programs that use libpcap/WinPcap into one line. --J Morgan(talk) 22:12, 1 November 2006 (UTC)


See, THIS is why I love Wikipedia :-) I knew the concept (sort of), I just didn't get the wording right. Thanks for the edit man. Good stuff.
PFloyd 22:06, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Article in need of cleanup - please assist if you can[edit]


I got a good laugh out of this, thanks bro! :D -/- Warren 20:55, 9 January 2007 (UTC)


I'm sorry for whatever I did to make you upset on that iPhone page. This is the comment I left on that page and I guess it acts as my apology and goodbye to Wikipedia:

I read the article about all those acronyms and everything and the whole WP:BITEing thing but I don't get what it is you guys are talking about. I'm not trolling, as far as I can tell. These are just some honest points of contention I wanted to bring up and now I feel like an idiot. My friend does a lot of Wikipedia stuff and said the community was really great and a nice place to learn and get to know people. I guess I don't see what she was talking about. I really wanted to help with this article because computers are really neat and I think having a phone-computer is a really good idea. I even have a friend with the older iPhone model and thought I could use some personal experience to build the best page we could. I'm still new and learning the ropes, or at least I was. I'm sorry for whatever I did. Cynthia18 11:01, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Gifts of Deceit[edit]

  • Thank you for the corrections/wikifications, I was unaware of these articles. Thanks for your time. Yours, Smee 03:58, 9 May 2007 (UTC).

My Userpage[edit]

Thanks for reverting my userpage. These vandals are starting to bug me. --Random Say it here! 02:34, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Notability of Starseed (New Age)[edit]

Information icon.svg

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Starseed (New Age), by Xinit, another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Starseed (New Age) seems to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Starseed (New Age), please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Please note, this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion, it did not nominate Starseed (New Age) itself. Feel free to leave a message on the bot operator's talk page if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot. --Android Mouse Bot 2 10:44, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

"Our" new microarchitecture? Who are "we"[edit]

Haven't you heard? Companies' marketing departments now write Wikipedia entries about their goods. ;) --Tene 03:09, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Mac mini[edit]

Thanks for the suggested changes. I haven't made many edits, and want to make sure I get it right. (I completely missed the 'mini' capitalization mistakes, and made a few in my comments section - thanks for that as well.) - Wttnr 22:53, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

iPhone question[edit]

Sorry for posting an inappropriate discussion item, but I appreciate your assistance. I'm about to receive my iPhone and curious to hear about its use with Wiki-software, so again, thank you for your help. Take care!-AmesG 16:46, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Avoiding redirects[edit]

You made an edit here to direct a link to the final place, i.e. you made it Kismet (software) instead of Kisment (program) which redirects anyway to software. Usually we don't need to do this. See Wikipedia:Tools/Navigation popups/About fixing redirects and Wikipedia:Redirect#Do_not_change_links_to_redirects_that_are_not_broken here. Thanks! i said 19:03, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

IBM Mainframe Operating Systems[edit]

Thanks for the link to Auslander & Jaffe's IBMSJ article - I used it to back up the sections on MFT and MVT as well. Philcha (talk) 20:47, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Proposal to merge articles about IBM OS/360 and successors[edit]

I've proposed this merger, see Talk:OS/360 and successors. So far only 3 people have contributed to the discussion, including me. Since you know a bit about the subject, would you like to contribute? Philcha (talk) 08:18, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

CISC commentary regarding RICH[edit]

Hi Guy,

Were you a contributor on usenet group, comp.arch?

--UnicornTapestry (talk) 05:12, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Solaris on PPC[edit]

I think it's clear that the PPC certification for 2.5.1 is an "as well as" for the SPARC and Intel ports. Expand the entry if you like, but don't get me started on war stories. PhGustaf (talk) 23:47, 8 December 2007 (UTC)


You've probably noticed that I moved the non-Kubrick part of the CRM section into a footnote. There were several reasons for this -- not only was it looking a little too big for what is basically a sidebar subject (worthwhile to include, yes, but not to spend a lot of space on), but also having it there in what some people will insist as seeing as a "trivia" list would just attract the attention of people who'd be quite happy to delete it entirely. I felt that by pushing down the off-topic part into a note and leaving the part actually relevant to the article's topic, I was, in effect, helping to protect it and avoid a fight over its inclusion.

Also, thanks for catching the bad John Adams link on my user page. Ed Fitzgerald (unfutz) (talk/cont) 10:10, 12 January 2008 (UTC)


32-bit software applications typically need atleast 2^31 bits of memory i.e two gigabit memory size (~256 megabytes of RAM). Such semiconductor products were available for mass market only recently (not 1990s). Ofcourse limited editions were available at premium prices in the 1990s for select customers in the top-end of the market. Anwar (talk) 10:58, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Just curious[edit]

Hi Guy:

I'm here to ask about your edit summary in Paris Hilton.

The first part I got, but the rest is a puzzle.

(Get rid of extra blank mind^Wline.)

As I say, just curious.

Thanks, Wanderer57 (talk) 21:18, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. I just learned from our article that TENEX goes way way back. I'm not sure if I never knew about it, or knew but then forgot.
Cheers, Wanderer45^WWanderer57 (talk) 22:09, 10 February 2008 (UTC)


Judging by Talk:iPhone, I don't know if I want to wade deeper into that mess. -- Cyrius| 23:58, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Deep packet capture[edit]

Please give your opinion on a merge of Deep packet capture with Network monitoring. Kgrr (talk) 15:54, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Looking for Wikipedians for a User Study[edit]

Hello. I am a graduate student in the Department of Computer Science and Engineering at the University of Minnesota. We are conducting research on ways to engage content experts on Wikipedia. Previously, Wikipedia started the Adopt-a-User program to allow new users to get to know seasoned Wikipedia editors. We are interested in learning more about how this type of relationship works. Based on your editing record on Wikipedia, we thought you might be interested in participating. If chosen to participate, you will be compensated for your time. We estimate that most participants will spend an hour (over two weeks on your own time and from your own computer) on the study. To learn more or to sign up contact KATPA at CS dot UMN dot EDU or User:KatherinePanciera/WPMentoring. Thanks. KatherinePanciera (talk) 02:15, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

request for input on AT Attachment article name[edit]

Greetings, you have contributed in the past to the "AT Attachment" article. That article is now the subject of a rename (move) discussion. Your input would be appreciated. The discussion is here. The situation is slightly complex, so a bit of reading will be needed to see what's going on. Thanks! Jeh (talk) 03:56, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Orion's Arm[edit]

Ambox warning pn.svg

An editor has nominated Orion's Arm, an article which you have created or worked on, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Orion's Arm and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to address the nominator's concerns but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you.Robofish (talk) 22:12, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Counter-terrorism vs anti-terrorism for RAID[edit]

Please refer to Counter-terrorism, particularly the "Anti-terrorism versus counter-terrorism". I quote:

"Counter-terrorism refers to offensive strategies intended to prevent a belligerent, in a broader conflict, from successfully using the tactic of terrorism."; this refers, in a veiled manner, to the use of terrorist techniques to fight terrorist groups. In practice, these have included so-called "targeted assassination", kidnaping, torture, etc.

This is further confirmed in the article with "To continue the analogy between air and terrorist capability, offensive counter-air missions attack the airfields of the opponent, while defensive counter-air uses antiaircraft missiles to protect a point on one's own territory."

"Anti-terrorism is defensive (...) used to reduce the vulnerability of individuals and property to terrorist acts, to include limited response and containment by local military and civilian forces.". Precisely the sort of things into which RAID engages, and by opposition to preemptive attacks abroad, which are the domain of military units under COS. Rama (talk) 08:52, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Comparison of application virtual machines[edit]

can you explain me the difference in object model links you removed and the object model used in "application virtual machines"?--Efa (talk) 09:37, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

ok, let me ask in another form: can you explain me how can different managed languages use object defined in other managed languages? In other words: Are the "Common Type System" part of the "application virtual machines" or not?--Efa (talk) 20:21, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

As a start you should read the articles Common Type System and Dynamic Language Runtime. Then you can search a little more, to find other on CLI theory. The source is ECMA-335--Efa (talk) 14:22, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

I added a column with virtual machines that support an object model usable by all its managed languages. Then I added a column for dynamic typing. I filled the fields where I know the values, please fill the others. I left out the links to the object models in See also section--Efa (talk) 22:22, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

KDE Platform: One article vs. many articles for individual components[edit]

Please keep the individual components within the main KDE Platform article. A single article is easier to maintain. The individual articles were never really maintained, so unless you commit to maintain all of them yourself, please keep it the article the way it is now. I don't have any motivation to keep 1000 different articles updated, though I plan to improve the single one over time. --KAMiKAZOW (talk) 13:09, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

Mac OS X Lion season[edit]

While I understand that the seasons are opposite depending on the hemisphere (and being intimately familiar with this fact), I think including the season is redundant information. If users want to know what summer means, we can wikilink the term summer; as it is, every external source that mentions the release, including Apple's statement, simply says Summer 2011. At risk of being facetious, there isn't any reference that states it WON'T be released in Southern Hemisphere summer 2011; it is instead implied that is what is meant. Per WP:SEASON, neutral terms are preferred (as in a month/quarter), but in this case per sources all we can assume is that either the release is completely ambiguous as to which summer it refers, or it is obviously implied (which is the trend any external source seems to take). On that note, a quick search of other articles seems to follow this pattern. Any followup thoughts? ~Araignee (talkcontribs) 15:25, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

Guy Harris[edit]

Thanks for your changes on tz database. Keep up your great work. :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 18:42, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

filesystems directories then files vs files then directories[edit]

Why did you move directories earlier in the article, specifically before filename?

I am about to add a record paragraph and would like to keep the structures ordered. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DGerman (talkcontribs) 14:49, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

filesystems allocation: blocks/clusters/fragments/chunks/hunks ugh![edit]

You are correct regarding these terms. I am trying to figure out how to phrase that without using "keywords" which are specific to a particular file system. It ain't easy. Let me give it another go.

How's this?

Next paragraph to be added in this section will discuss fragmentation.

Your input is be appreciated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DGerman (talkcontribs) 16:36, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

Thank You![edit]

Thank you for bringing the catagories back on the Mac OS X Lion page! Apparently, I didn't know what I was doing. Keep up the great work! ~Applecot — Preceding unsigned comment added by Applecot (talkcontribs) 18:42, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

Re: So what got changed?[edit]

Hi Guy, see my response to a similar question here. However in the case of the "file system" page, I accidentally imported too many edits, so there are two duplicate edits at the start of the history: one under the username "The_ansible" and the other (which is the edit that I imported) under the name "The ansible". Unfortunately, the two edits cannot be separated because they have exactly the same timestamp. Graham87 08:08, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

Yes, and that one. Graham87 08:48, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

Net legends[edit]

As a contributor to this article, you may be interested to know it has been nominated for deletion. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Net legends. Robofish (talk) 16:40, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

SMP - Symmetric Multiprocessor System[edit]

Multiprocessing is a type of "processing" in which two or more processors work together to "process more than one program simultaneously", the term Multiprocessor is referred to the hardware architecture that allows multiprocessing:

Multiprocessing and Multiprocessors have different meanings — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ferry24.Milan (talkcontribs) 10:09, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Talk:Mac OS X[edit]

Geez, dude, give me a chance! :-) Rostz (talk) 02:39, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your contribution![edit]

Guy Harris, thank you for your contribution to the article netsniff-ng! :-) — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 14:23, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification[edit]

Hi. When you recently edited Jerry Trimble, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Butcher (film) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:44, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

Mac OS X for featured article[edit]

Since you're the most active contributor to the Mac OS X article, I was wondering if you could nominate Mac OS X for tomorrow's featured article. Thanks! Mchcopl (talk) 06:03, 20 February 2012 (UTC)!


Allaroundamazingbarnstar.png All Around Amazing Barnstar
For your contribs to Apple articles. Zach Vega (talk) 01:29, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 18[edit]

Hi. When you recently edited OS X, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Darwin (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:26, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Don't confuse "your reality at the time" with reality especially when there is a history log[edit]

It seems that you forgot that you could not cover your tracks on the circular reference you created. You snide remark got me to look in the history. It's a shame that people like you cannot accept that you made a mistake, which you did. See below!

06:56, 18 March 2012 (diff | hist) . . (+4)‎ . . ASR-33 Teletype ‎ (Undid revision 482460558 by Wa3frp (talk) - the "good faith" wasn't just "good faith", it was based on the reality at the time. That reality has been restored.) (top) 06:55, 18 March 2012 (diff | hist) . . (+6)‎ . . Keyboard Send Receive ‎ (Keyboard send receive going to ASR-33 was a mistake; the mistake has been undone, so there's no double-redirect any more.) (top)

Also, the Keyboard Send Receive article is really a stub that should be expanded if you don't want it to be redirected again. 12:41, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Teletype Model 12 & Baudot Code[edit]

You have to understand that Baudot Code was the only teleprinter code at that time. ASCII was decades away. Since this is an article about the manufacturer and the manufacturer's equipment, the Baudot Code comment should be deleted. Otherwise, the same sentence needs to be added to each model of equipment/Wa3frp (talk) 13:29, 5 April 2012 (UTC)


Do you use it? There is not an available citation because the changes to the iOS Simulator and suggestions to move to LLDB are not documented. I can post screen shots if you're not currently an XCode user, or would accept that for a citation... — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 21:25, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 19[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Ethernet over copper, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page PBX (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:38, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Clarification of paging edit[edit]

The reason that I reverted the edit by user:Wbm1058 to Paging was that his description was that he was changing it to a direct link, which was incorrect; had he stated that he was changing a Piped link to a section of an article to a redirect then I would have left it as is. Sorry for the confusion. Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul (talk) 22:57, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 12[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Chattr, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages UFS and AFP (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:04, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

Mac mini[edit]

Hi, as a fellow Mac article editor, please weigh in on the recent anon editor addition of memory spec info [4] that a couple editors have reverted as inappropriately sourced to a user forum. (User has been informed of policy and is ignoring it, blanking his talk page, and despite BRD I'd rather not EW myself.) Thanks, Rostz (talk) 06:12, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

Your removal of OSx86-related stuff[edit]

The stuff that you removed from Mac OS X Snow Leopard#Use on unsupported hardware does not seem to be a duplicate from OSx86. You might want to check the same material on Mac OS X Leopard#Usage on unsupported hardware, where I have removed an unneeded hatnote. -- (talk) 04:38, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

macbook pro revision[edit]


Thanks for moving the content into right place :)

Believe me, I had a shock when I notice that, there was no lock on macbook pro retina. Can.kilic1981 (talk) 02:29, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

Thank you[edit]

I just thought I would thank you for all the help that you had given to the article on diabetic diet as of January 8, 2013 - it is much appreciated. ACEOREVIVED (talk) 11:42, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

January 2013[edit]

Information.svg Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, such as on Reboot (computing), you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button Insert-signature.png or Button sig.png located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when they said it. Thank you. Codename Lisa (talk) 08:20, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 29[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited ASCII, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page TENEX (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:19, 29 January 2013 (UTC)


Wow, I can't believe you took the time to do that! Two notes:

  • Curly quotes, as in "Robert ‘Bob’ W", should not be used.
  • Personally, really hate {{sfn}} and templates like it. They break scripts and bots that look for <ref> tags.

Anomie 12:14, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

Information Processing Architecture (IPA)[edit]

Noticed your recent IBM SNA edits. Can you start a wikipedia entry/page for this? See talk/article pages for Boldon James, International Computers Limited and IPA (disambiguation) for some suitable material. Can compare it to SNA or DECnet ? (talk)



I'm not sure how people talking about NICs in PCs without add-on cards is relevant to the addition I made (defining the "NIC" acronym). I feel it's necessary to define NIC somewhere on this page, as there is no such definition anywhere to be found, even though NIC references are scattered about the article. Other Wikipedia articles define such acronyms, I don't see why it would be avoided in this one. "Network interface card" is clearly the most commonly used definition of NIC (you yourself admit this as your issue with its usage in the modern PC is that the modern PC has no add-on cards--"cards" being the key word), despite the fact that people use it incorrectly in sentences about modern PCs. Frankly, that example is a bit hypocritical as you deleted the "no duplicate redundancy" complaint I added because you found it wasn't "notable." If incorrect usage of a commonly accepted acronym is not notable, then why is incorrect usage of the acronym as it relates to integrated components (no "cards") on a modern PC notable enough to hide the definition of the acronym?

One might also consider that many people visit this Wikipedia article simply to learn about just such a debate (e.g. am I being redundant when I say "NIC card?"). — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 18:21, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

I've done that[edit]

I have moved AIM alliance to Related Links.Applist (talk) 13:21, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 9[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Netstat, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Solaris (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 18:32, 9 April 2013 (UTC)


Thanks for pointing me to {{man}}, I didn't know about that template - now I do :-) -- 2A03:3680:0:3:0:0:0:67 (talk) 00:47, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 17[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Desktop virtualization, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Emulation (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 01:36, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

Infobox is not for history[edit]


One more thing, infoboxes are not for history I would think. There are history sections for that. PowerPC is (probably) there or should be. Am I wrong? Then revert again. comp.arch (talk) 15:06, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

file and tzdb[edit]

I removed the discussion of file in the timezone database. I am pretty sure that the removal is correct but I wante to double check with you. The entry stated:

"file command has support for displaying the binary timezone files in a human-friendly textual form built-in"

$ file /usr/share/zoneinfo/Europe/Berlin
/usr/share/zoneinfo/Europe/Berlin: timezone data, version 2, 8 gmt time flags, 8 std time flags, no leap seconds, 144 transition times, 8 abbreviation chars

file is an awesome tool, many thanks, but it does not display the files in a human friendly text form. You can read the man page for file and get a pretty good idea that this is not a good description of what file does. Am I totally off base? If the description in the article was accurate that would mean that the EST5EDT, PST8PDT and Tasmania were all identical timezones, or aat the very least the tzdb for each zone was identical:

$ file PST8PDT EST5EDT Australia/Tasmania
PST8PDT:            timezone data, version 2, 4 gmt time flags, 4 std time flags, no leap seconds, 149 transition times, 4 abbreviation chars
EST5EDT:            timezone data, version 2, 4 gmt time flags, 4 std time flags, no leap seconds, 149 transition times, 4 abbreviation chars
Australia/Tasmania: timezone data, version 2, 4 gmt time flags, 4 std time flags, no leap seconds, 149 transition times, 4 abbreviation chars

DouglasCalvert (talk) 18:33, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

Season case[edit]

Hi Guy, thanks for your notification re OS X Mavericks. Please see this section of MOS for lower case seasons. Best Spicemix (talk) 22:56, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

program memory[edit]

Dear Guy Harris,

Thank you for making Wikipedia significantly better.

One recent edit[5] mystifies me: Does there was no "program memory" separate from "data memory" imply that no Harvard architecture machines were in use at that time?

Harvard architecture processors seem pretty popular today. You almost certainly have a (Harvard architecture) 8048 variant inside your keyboard. You likely have other Harvard-architecture microcontrollers scattered about your house (mouse, remote control, microwave, etc.) and nearby automobiles. The BASIC Stamp and Arduino seem pretty popular.

Is the fall and rise of Harvard architecture processors something that needs to be added to the History of computing hardware or History of computing hardware (1960s–present) articles? Or is there some other article that already covers the fall and rise of Harvard architecture processors? What changed to make Harvard architectures fall out of favor, and what changed to make them popular again?

(Is there a better place to post the above questions, to attract the attention of people who can answer it before that knowledge is lost to history?) --DavidCary (talk) 10:56, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

Wireshark as Web scraper?[edit]

All I know is that it was listed as a web scraping tool here. I've added the category only to tools in that list. I suppose that any software with good scripting capabilities and network connectivity can be used as a scraping tool by someone experienced with it. Diego Moya (talk) 20:05, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

Translation lookahead buffer[edit]

I stand corrected, I found out that it was some of IBM's mainframe competitors that used regular memory (instead of (then) extremely expensive cache) for TLB entries; I thought IBM did the same thing. I have restored the portion that was deleted with a correction indicating that certain specific manufacturer's machines just used regular memory for TLB tables, and have not included IBM mainframes in that list. This, I think, makes it easier to understand and does not confuse people as I was, when I thought since IBM's competitors in the mainframe business and Digital, for some of its less-expensive minis back in the 1970s were using regular memory for TLB tables that everyone did it that way, including IBM. Paul Robinson (Rfc1394) (talk) 23:28, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

In response to your note on my talk page:
Two things. First, I know the Univac machines, which is what the 90/60 and 90/70 were after Sperry was eaten by Univac after it bought the Spectra Series from RCA after RCA lost $500 million - I got the number from The Peter Principle, how RCA management loses 1/2 billion 1970 dollars and gets away with it, and still keeps their pension and maybe doesn't even get fired - and RCA sold the computer equipment division and the Spectra 70 line of computers to Sperry and some of the hardware division to Singer Corporation, had a TLB; I remember it from the documentation. Maybe Univac added it to make the machines more competitive with the 370; I don't know.
Now as far as what that memory was, you're making an assumption that it says the TLB entries are in memory that it's something different than the memory that ordinary programs or the rest of the code that the TSOS operating system used. I'm not presuming that to be the case; it's a fact not in evidence. If it doesn't say that the memory was cache or something different, I don't presume it was. Let's not forget, these competitors to IBM can't compete on quality, no matter how good their stuff was, and it probably was equal to IBM in quality, IBM still has the name. They have to compete on price, and for something as esoteric as TLB space nobody's going to understand or care unless they're an engineer and know the difference.
Second, you actually have Spectra 70 series manuals? (Surprisingly enough, I just looked, has one, but they want an incredible $150 for it.) Are they PDFs or are they actual hard copy? If they're PDF's or images I'd like to know where you downloaded them from so I can. If they're hard copy I'd like to find out if you can have them scanned, or in the alternative, if I can borrow them, I'll scan them and I'll use my scanner myself to scan the pages so they can go up on Bitsavers. I've been looking for years for anything related to the Univac 90/60, especially source code or manuals, and I'd be interested in anything related to its predecessor, the Sperry and Spectra lines. So let me know if you have manuals, I'd like to know where you got them from, or if I can borrow them and scan them and return them in the same shape as I got them; I'll even pay the postage both ways. Thanks. Paul Robinson (Rfc1394) (talk) 02:00, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 29[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Single user mode, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Solaris (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:08, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Jumper cable[edit]

Hi Guy,
There is a difference between a jumper cable and a jumper cable to start an engine. the former could be a control cable. Peter Horn User talk 18:41, 4 September 2013 (UTC) Peter Horn User talk 18:43, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

SNA portion of the Cisco ITH[edit]

Hello Guy Sorry i got engrossed in studying the SNA portion before making sure the re-direct went where it should! I'll be sure & remember to keep things prioritized when making future edits. Thanks for catching my foul-up, an I hope you & yours have a grand one Tech77 (talk) 02:05, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 11[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 64-bit computing, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Tablets (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:10, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Editors Barnstar Hires.png The Editor's Barnstar
Your consistent contributions to OS X have been a huge help. Thanks yo. Zach Vega (talk to me) 23:54, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

regard or regards[edit]

According to the world's largest corpus of actual usage, "with regard to" is used twice as often as "with regards to". (See So per your logic of most common or typical usage, the change has been reverted. Which sounds better is a subjective matter and usually dependent on whichever usage you heard most while young. Same reason some people think "on accident" or "needs closed" are proper usage. Jjk (talk) 12:49, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

ARM architectures and other (e.g. 360 architecture)[edit]

Hi, you seem to know what you are talking about and agree with me with saying there are "current architectures" of ARM. Some people seem to disagree and say in this thread: Talk:ARM_architecture#Name_of_the_article [[6]]. People point to IBM System/360 architecture saying that one has also evolved but still should be singular. You seem to know about that one. I think that is just a simple extension 32->64 bit extensions similar to MIPS and the rest of all RISC architectures I know (at least all mention in the thread). Do you know otherwise? And if it still kept kernel mode (exceptions and interrupt and such stuff, not just user mode) backwards compatibility, like the x86-* ? I didn't realize how prolific you must be until looking at your talk page.. I'm still a beginner getting myself into hot water :) comp.arch (talk) 20:32, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

What I meant to say basically is, when is a new version of the architecture, not just a new (fully backwards compatible) "version" and gets to be a "new", architecture? I think when then architecture in general or (user mode and/or kernel mode) ISA changes (not just microarchitecture) in ways that are not fully bacwards compatible. Agree? How many of those ARM versions are there? And do you remember examples from other architectures? 6800 vs 68000 was mentioned as more worthy and I just am not sure (haven't looked to much at 6800). comp.arch (talk) 20:40, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 8[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Microcomputer, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Altos (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:13, 8 October 2013 (UTC)


Hi Guy. I saw that you revered my edit on Paging. I was just referring to the fact that this approach tends to be more common in modern systems. ie it is nearly universal now whereas in the past it was largely restricted to larger systems. If I get time I may try to spell this out more. Robert Brockway (talk) 00:06, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

IBM 650[edit]

Thanks for noticing -- and fixing -- my goofs. (talk) 04:35, 15 November 2013 (UTC) aka.,, and, back in 2006-2012 the 69.106......s

IBM 533[edit]

Arnold created a separate article for the 533. Brief text, totally useless apart from the 650 - the 533 article should be merged into the 650 article. Something you have to log on to WP to do, as I recall. Could you do it - or start some process such that someone else does it? Thanks, (talk) 20:57, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

x86 register[edit]

both IP/EIP and EFL are store/address register for instruction point and stack status so which they count as general purpose.

for ex:


World of WarCraft: Retail Build (build 17399)

Exe: C:\Program Files (x86)\World of Warcraft\WoW.exe Time: User: Administrator Computer:

This application has encountered a critical error:

ERROR #132 (0x85100084) Fatal exception!

Program: C:\Program Files (x86)\World of Warcraft\WoW.exe ProcessID: 2472 Exception: 0xC0000005 (ACCESS_VIOLATION) at 0023:007E3A28

The instruction at "0x007E3A28" referenced memory at "0x808376EC". The memory could not be "read".

<Version> <Config> Retail <Inspector.ProjectId> 10 <Inspector.BuildNumber> <Inspector.Branch> 5.4.0 <Application> World of WarCraft Type: WoW Executable UUID: <Wow.Platform> X86 User: Computer: Virtual Memory: 1477.64 MB Free Disk Space: 325.27 GB Exe Built: Sep 23 2013 18:30:35 App Up Time: 0 days, 4 hours, 41 minutes, 38 seconds System Up Time: 2 days, 22 hours, 10 minutes, 10 seconds Session Time(hh:mm:ss): 04:41:25 <SessionTime.Grouping> 04:30:00 - 04:44:59 Time in World(hh:mm:ss): 04:39:25 <TimeInWorld.Grouping> 04:30:00 - 04:44:59 <CharLogins> 1 <Mem.OomRecoveries> 0 Addon resource usage (not including lua memory): 0 Total lua memory: 29193KB <Addons.Current> (null) <Addons.Current.Function> UNKNOWN <Addons.Current.Object> (null) <Addons.HasAny.Loading> No <Addons.HasAny.Loaded> No Number of successful WoWConnections: 28 <Realm.Name> <Realm.IP> <LocalZone.Name> <LocalZone.AreaID> 3425 Local Player: , 028000000251DCFD, (1, -6761.83, 772.03, 88.91)

CVar Settings: <CVar.locale> <CVar.Sound_EnableHardware> 1 <CVar.shadowLevel> 1 <CVar.showToolsUI> 1 <CVar.specular> 1 <CVar.enterWorld> 1 <CVar.hwDetect> 0 <CVar.videoOptionsVersion> 5 <CVar.graphicsQuality> 2 <CVar.mouseSpeed> 1 <CVar.Gamma> 0.900000 <CVar.readTOS> 1 <CVar.readEULA> 1 <CVar.accounttype> MP <CVar.ChatMusicVolume> 0.29999998211861 <CVar.ChatSoundVolume> 0.39999997615814 <CVar.ChatAmbienceVolume> 0.29999998211861 <CVar.VoiceActivationSensitivity> 0.39999997615814 <CVar.Sound_MusicVolume> 0.40000000596046 <CVar.Sound_AmbienceVolume> 0.30000001192093 <CVar.farclip> 600 <CVar.particleDensity> 40 <CVar.waterDetail> 1 <CVar.rippleDetail> 1 <CVar.reflectionMode> 0 <CVar.weatherDensity> 1 <CVar.gameTip> 147 <CVar.Sound_SFXVolume> 0.30000001192093 <CVar.maxFPSBk> 100 <CVar.readScanning> -1 <CVar.readContest> -1 <CVar.readTerminationWithoutNotice> -1 <CVar.installType> Retail <CVar.realmName> <CVar.Sound_OutputDriverName> Realtek HD Audio output <CVar.OutboundChatVolume> 2.5 <CVar.VoiceChatMode> 1 <CVar.Sound_VoiceChatInputDriverIndex> 1 <CVar.Sound_VoiceChatInputDriverName> Realtek HD Audio Input <CVar.Sound_VoiceChatOutputDriverIndex> 1 <CVar.Sound_VoiceChatOutputDriverName> Realtek HD Audio output <CVar.Sound_EnableSoundWhenGameIsInBG> 1 <CVar.installLocale> enUS <CVar.gxApi> D3D9 <CVar.gxWindow> 0 <CVar.gxMaximize> 0 <CVar.gxRefresh> 75/1 <CVar.Sound_EnableAmbience> 0 <CVar.launchThirtyTwoBitClient> 1 <CVar.Sound_OutputDriverIndex> 1 <CVar.uiScale> 0.79999995231628 <CVar.useUiScale> 1 <CVar.Sound_MasterVolume> 0.5100000500679 <CVar.terrainLodDist> 300 <CVar.wmoLodDist> 300 <CVar.terrainTextureLod> 1 <CVar.environmentDetail> 75 <CVar.groundEffectDensity> 40 <CVar.groundEffectDist> 110 <CVar.terrainMipLevel> 1 <CVar.worldBaseMip> 1 <CVar.Sound_ZoneMusicNoDelay> 1 <CVar.maxAnimThreads> 1 <CVar.lastCharacterIndex> 4

Installation settings:

UID: wow Expansion Level: 4 PTR: 0 Beta: 0 PatchURL: ProductCode: 'WoW'


GxApi: D3D9 <Graphics.ShaderModel> 3_0

 Vertex: vs_3_0
 Pixel: ps_3_0

Adapter Count: 1

Adapter 0 (primary):

 Driver: nv4_disp.dll
 Version: 6.14.0011.9107
 Description: NVIDIA GeForce 9600 GT
 DeviceName: \\.\DISPLAY1
 <Graphics.PCIIdentifier> VID=0x10DE,DID=0x0622,REV=0xA1,SSID=0xC8613842
 <Graphics.VendorID> 0x10DE

Installed DX9 Version: File Version: 5.3.3790.3959 Window State:

 <Graphics.WSIconic> TRUE
 <Graphics.WSForeground> Other
 <Graphics.WSPresentTest> 0x88760868

NV Gpu 0:

 Clocks: Levels=1, Domains=3, PerfLevel=0, PerfFlags=0x20B
   Clock Level: Level=0, Level Flags=0x4
     Domain: Id=0, Domain Flags=0x0, Freq (def,min,max)=500000 KHz (500000, 125000, 1000000)
     Domain: Id=4, Domain Flags=0x0, Freq (def,min,max)=900000 KHz (900000, 225000, 1320000)
     Domain: Id=7, Domain Flags=0x0, Freq (def,min,max)=1200000 KHz (1200000, 300000, 2400000)
 Unable to get thermal settings

NV SLI State:


<Inspector.IssueType> Exception <Inspector.Summary:> ERROR #132 (0x85100084) Fatal exception!

The instruction at "0x007E3A28" referenced memory at "0x808376EC".

The memory could not be "read". 0xC0000005 (ACCESS_VIOLATION) at 0023:007E3A28 <:Inspector.Summary>

<Inspector.Assertion:> DBG-ADDR<007E3A28>("WoW.exe") DBG-ADDR<0081D0EE>("WoW.exe") DBG-ADDR<007B8AF6>("WoW.exe") DBG-ADDR<00792D07>("WoW.exe") DBG-ADDR<00795978>("WoW.exe") DBG-ADDR<00795AB4>("WoW.exe") DBG-ADDR<00795C9B>("WoW.exe") DBG-ADDR<0078FB3C>("WoW.exe") DBG-ADDR<007902DA>("WoW.exe") DBG-ADDR<00792416>("WoW.exe") DBG-ADDR<00791C3C>("WoW.exe") DBG-ADDR<0044CF33>("WoW.exe") DBG-ADDR<0044AAE5>("WoW.exe") DBG-ADDR<0044B8C9>("WoW.exe") DBG-ADDR<0044BDA5>("WoW.exe") DBG-ADDR<0044BDDA>("WoW.exe") <:Inspector.Assertion> <Inspector.HashBlock:> DBG-OPTIONS<NoImage NoAddress NoFileLine NoDbgAddr> DBG-ADDR<007E3A28>("WoW.exe") DBG-ADDR<0081D0EE>("WoW.exe") DBG-ADDR<007B8AF6>("WoW.exe") DBG-ADDR<00792D07>("WoW.exe") DBG-ADDR<00795978>("WoW.exe") DBG-ADDR<00795AB4>("WoW.exe") DBG-OPTIONS<> <:Inspector.HashBlock>

   x86 Registers

EAX=885F275C EBX=00000000 ECX=885F2780 EDX=808376E8 ESI=0251DCFD EDI=0000000F EBP=0356FC60 ESP=0356FC5C EIP=007E3A28 FLG=00010283 CS =0023 DS =002B ES =002B SS =002B FS =0053 GS =002B

EIP and EFL are usually not counted as "general purpose". EIP cannot be used for anything except the instruction pointer. Similarly EFL (flags) is hardwired to a specific use; it cannot be used to store and later retrieve arbitrary information (and it has not much to do with the stack, btw). See for example here:
The x86 architecture has 8 General-Purpose Registers (GPR), 
6 Segment Registers, 1 Flags Register and an Instruction Pointer.

I may be wrong, but I'm not the only person with this opinion. Jeh (talk) 05:40, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

You're not wrong. No way are EIP and EFL general purpose registers. Guy Harris (talk) 05:49, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

x86-64 register do support lower 8 bit mode and all register included r8~r15 are accessible in legacy mode and is common in EM64T processor and later AMD64 processor with macro fusion(each op are capable access through all main register, included r8~r15 in both long mode and legacy mode ) or Virtualization (allow 8/16/32 bit instruction to be fill in r8~r15 register) — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 09:32, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

Crusoe register[edit]

crusoe may have 64 internal register but it is hard to tell which is for general purpose and which is for register renaming considering crusoe is out of order processor. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 03:55, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

Response on my talk page.[edit]

I responded to your question on my talk page; please delete this section after you have read my response. Thanks. Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul (talk) 19:21, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

Frame synchronization (video)[edit]

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Frame synchronization (video), and it appears to include material copied directly from

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 20:35, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

If one were to follow the "WARNING: DO NOT CITE" link on the page at Princeton, it takes you to a page that says:
This content of this page is taken from Wikipedia, and may not be up-to-date. The objective of this website is NOT to provide information, but to demonstrate an automatic document organizer and browser. Please visit the original Wikipedia page if you're interested in content. Feel free to cite the paper on Visualizing Topic Models, International AAAI Conference on Social Media and Weblogs, 2012.
so it is not surprising that they have the same material - the site at Princeton copied it from the Wikipedia! I will remove the tag in question. Guy Harris (talk) 20:39, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

B5000 A/B[edit]

On the Br000 Processor A and Processor B had different model numbers; I can track them down if you need them. Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul (talk) 16:07, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 3[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited IOS, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Cocoa (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:54, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

Rcats on OS X product line[edit]

In regard to Mac OS X, Mac OS X Server and your partial reversions of my edits on such:

  • It appears you are interpreting the text of {{r from long name}} rather strictly, in the sense that both a "more complete" and "less complete" form must be in simultaneous official use, and hence a former name cannot also be a long name. Is there a previous discussion justifying that this is the consensus? Or should I start one?
  • I disagree with {{r from historic name}} on the grounds that its text implies a focus on "history" as it is popularly defined (i.e., a longer time scale than would normally exist in the computing industry). I feel that only {{r from former name}} should have been used to express that the name was changed. Is there something I'm missing?

--SoledadKabocha (talk) 04:06, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

With regards to the first question:
The documentation for Template:r from long name says:
This is a redirect from a of a person, organization, legislative act, etc. It leads to the title in accordance with the naming conventions for common names and can help writing. However, do not replace these redirected links with a piped link unless the page is updated for another reason. For more information, see the category.
and the linked-to category's description says "The pages in this category are redirects from titles that are a complete or more complete name, for example of a person or a legislative act.", and both the template and category documentation refer to the naming conventions for articles, which sounds to me as if it's intended for cases where the full "proper" name of something isn't the more common name. For example, that category includes .44 Remington Magnum, but I suspect it's better known as just the .44 Magnum, and includes 8010 Star Information System, which was generally called just the Xerox Star.
However, it's not as if the full name for the OS is "Mac OS X", with people generally shortening it to "OS X". The full name for the OS, according to the vendor, is now just "OS X" - they started dropping the "Mac" in Lion, although they didn't consistently refer to it as "OS X" until Mountain Lion.
So I don't see "r from long name" as being appropriate for OS X; OS X isn't a commonly-used shortened name for an OS whose full proper name is "Mac OS X", it's the current full proper name for an OS whose full proper name used to be "Mac OS X". Guy Harris (talk) 06:49, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
Hmmm, ok. Well, do you mind if I take this to WT:Categorizing redirects for further confirmation? --SoledadKabocha (talk) 07:18, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
Go ahead. Guy Harris (talk) 07:21, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
With regards to the second question:
National Association of LGBT Community Centers is deemed a "redirect from historic name", but the National Association of LGBT Community Centers was renamed to CenterLink in 2008, only four years before OS X Mountain Lion was released, and well within time scales that normally exist in the computer industry.
If "historic" refers to "history as popularly defined", and that refers to history in areas that don't continually change on short time frames (such as the history of human societies), so that neither 2008 or 2011/2012 count as "historic", both should be fixed, and the template's and category's documentation should make it clearer what counts as "historic".
If "historic" refers to history of the particular area to which the named entity belongs, something changing 2-3 years ago could be considered "historic" when it comes to the history of computing. Guy Harris (talk) 07:39, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

UTF-8 and ASCII backward compatibility[edit]

Hello there! Just as a note, you might be interested in having a look at User talk:Spitzak § UTF-8 and ASCII backward compatibility. — Dsimic (talk | contribs) 19:22, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

I do not want to be involved into edit war[edit]

This is CloudComputation and thanks for your contribution at the template Template:Power Architecture. I think it is disruptive to distinct Historic and current, so I changed it to distinct it by series like PowerPC Series, RAD Series, Collaborated with Nintendo, etc. If you think your undo is not disruptive, leave me a message. CloudComputation (talk) 12:50, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

EDIT: Now the template uses italic font to how historic processors. CloudComputation (talk) 12:56, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 21[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited OS X Yosemite, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Spring (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:51, 21 June 2014 (UTC)

OS X[edit]

Just letting you know that I put up OS X for a Good Article reassessment. You can see the discussion here. Ten Pound Hammer(What did I screw up now?) 06:42, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

OS X Yosemite[edit]


I rolled the article back to your revision on 5 July and it is waiting for your review. There are things restored that I am not sure how'd you think about; i.e. whether you are glad that are restored and didn't notice when they were missing or you feel should have been gone.

Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 07:40, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

Reminders (application)[edit]


I just read your revert summary that says Reminders isn't "system software designed to help analyze, configure, optimize or maintain a computer". IMHO, it is: It helps maintain a computer by alerting the user of important events; defined by the user. The alert goes to the Notification Center after all, isn't it?

Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 17:30, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

You are right to a great extent; I never disagreed. There actually is a class of application software called personal information manager that is designed for planing and notification. But you are reading too much into a one-sentence definition that is supposed to sum up what a very large range of computer programs do in one or two sentences. Standalone programs are either application software or utility software. Utility software have utilitarian properties, meaning to make working with the computer easier in general, which applications are meant to make computers produce something. Reminders is the latter; made to make working with computers easier. Its ties to the Notification Center means it cannot act as productivity tool like Outlook.
This isn't just true about Reminders; it is correct in general too: Borderline similarity of feature does not necessarily warrant similar classification. For example, Word processors are applications whereas text editors are utilities (unless they are source code editors), in spite of the fact that both can type text. OneNote is an application whereas Sticky Notes is just a utility, although both are used for note-taking.
Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 21:23, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
Well, it appears we have reached an impasse; you're just confusing a lot of things, and since I don't usually edit the Mac area of Wikipedia, extending the discussion further is not on top of my priorities. As long as you don't try to schedule a birthday party with Reminders, you'll be fine. I'll leave the discussion and the article as is.
Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 23:55, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
Somebody's confused here, and it ain't me. Nowhere did I speak of scheduling a birthday party with Reminders, and it's not the use of Notification Center that prevents it from being used for that purpose, it's the fact that it's only connected to your calendar by virtue of being able to schedule a reminder to pop up on a given date - it's a to-do list manager, not a calendar program. Outlook includes the capabilities of several bundled OS X applications, including Mail, Calendar, and Reminders, so it can be used to manage tasks/to-dos and manage calendars and send e-mails. Guy Harris (talk) 00:14, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
So, the source is confused, I am confused, the article is confused but you are not confused. Fine, I'll take it. Normally, when I find myself in a situation where I think everyone but me is confused, I usually check to see if it is not in fact I who is confused... but that's just me. You suit yourself. Good luck.
Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 00:36, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
Given that the source says two contradictory things about "utility software", it is definitely confused. There is no need to rethink anything there.
As for you, well:
  • If you believe that the use of Notification Center affects what category a program fits into, you're confused about that. Outlook for Mac could, if it chose, pop up "task due" or "you have a meeting coming up" or "a mail just came in" notifications in Notification Center, and if there's an Office for Mac 2014, it may well do so.
  • If you believe that "alerting the user of important events", even if those events have nothing to do with the computer, constitutes "helping maintain the computer", then, unless you mean "maintain the computer" in a sense other than, say, keeping the computer in good condition by checking or repairing it regularly, you're confused about that - letting me know that I need to take my car in for servicing today, or that I need to inform some people about a new credit card, does not affect the maintenance of my computer at all.
  • If you believe I was asserting that you could schedule a birthday party using Reminder, you're confused, as I never asserted anything such as that.
  • If you believe that, somehow, by not "reading too much" into sentences that very specifically speak of "system software designed to help analyze, configure, optimize or maintain a computer" and software that "usually focuses on how the computer infrastructure (including the computer hardware, operating system, software and data storage) operates.", you can somehow believe that the article is intended to refer to to-do list programs and the like, you're confused.
The utility software page is "confused" only if it's not the case that the term "utility software" applies only to the types of software it talks about. There may well be reliable sources for the use of "utility software" to refer to software that does something other than manage the system itself; if so, the page needs to be fixed.
So, no, it's not as if it's somehow me against the world, and, no, there's no reason for me to rethink my ideas and believe that a reminders app is "system software designed to help analyze, configure, optimize or maintain a computer"; only if one has a definition of "[helping] analyze, configure, optimize or maintain a computer" that's deeply confused about what "analyze, configure, optimize or maintain a computer" means would one think that. Guy Harris (talk) 02:09, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
Hi. It is surprising that you refuse to win a discussion; but, so be it.
  • First, re-reading your arguments, I see that not enough attention is paid to certain words in the definition of utility and all examples given are restricted to repair tasks only. Especial attention is given to the word "maintain" itself, restricting it to huge maintenance tasks like critical repair. One of the words that you skip is "helps". That's why clipboard managers and screen savers are listed there as well. They don't maintain or configure a computer; they just help doing so. Screen savers help stop phosphor burn (although they don't do anything to monitor itself) and clipboard viewers are tools for analyzing a special portion of memory called clipboard.
  • Second, you are using an informal fallacy of pretending that the definition is all-barring whereas it is not. It just tries to give you a good idea as to what utility software is. That's because the definition of this class is descriptive, not prescriptive, i.e. it is created by observing the development efforts and their products, then classifying them. It has certainly not come from ordering all software developers to develop within the confines of one definition. Data compression, data synchronization, disk partitioning tools, archivers, system profilers and hex editors do not match your definition of utilities although they are still utilities and share common traits, like dealing computer infrastructure and doing stuff that only makes sense within the confines of computers. The word "utility" itself contributes to clarifying the definition.
Computers, to this date, cannot literally inform a human of anything; all they can do is to display a message and hope he sees it. Reminders just does that; it is a bit more complex but still doesn't shake anyone's shoulder. The actual utility value of what it does is entirely dependent on what the human writes in the message. It does share some similar traits with personal information managers but its simplicity makes it impractical for use as a PIM because it cannot share, sync or outline alerts nor does it support multiple alert methods, advance alerts and overdue alerts. It is a utility through and through.
Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 12:50, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
By that logic, as I pointed out before, e-mail programs and Web browsers would count as "utilities". If a program that could conceivably be used, however indirectly, in the process of maintaining one's computer is a "utility", the class becomes broad enough not to be interesting. If I end up suing the manufacturer of my computer to force them to replace a badly-designed motherboard, and write a document for that case using Microsoft Word, Word would become a "utility".
If the current version of utility software, with a lede speaking only of software that "designed to help analyze, configure, optimize or maintain a computer", gives the right meaning of "utility software", then the term should be restricted to tools whose primary purpose, for which it was designed, is helping analyze, configure, optimize, or maintain a computer. The mere fact that a given piece of software happens to have been useful in the process of analyzing, configuring, optimizing, or maintaining a computer is not relevant. All the mail user agents I know of were designed to read and send mail; they were not designed to help analyze, configure, optimize or maintain a computer, even if mail you send and replies you get could be helpful in the process of doing so. All the Web browsers I know of were designed to fetch and display documents of various sorts, run programs in some languages if embedded in those pages, play videos fetched, support sending some data, etc.; they were not designed to help analyze, configure, optimize or maintain a computer, even if information you find on the Web, posts you send to forums and replies you get, parts and components you get by ordering them over the Web, etc. could be helpful in the process of doing so. All the calendar managers I know of were designed to manage an appointment calendar; they were not designed to help analyze, configure, optimize or maintain a computer, even if service appointments you make with it are part of the process of doing so. And all the to-do list managers I know of were designed to manage to-do lists; they were not designed to help analyze, configure, optimize or maintain a computer, even if tasks they remind you that you need to do are part of the process of doing so. (They're not dating software, either, even if they can be used in the process of meeting someone of the appropriate sex.)
However, it is not clear that the current version of utility software does give the right meaning of "utility software"; as I noted, the first reference for the article speaks of PDF readers as "utility software", and all the PDF readers I know of were designed to render PDFs, not to help analyze, configure, optimize or maintain a computer, even if a document you pop up in a PDF reader can be helpful in that process. If "utility software" refers not to software "designed to help analyze, configure, optimize or maintain a computer", but refers, instead, to something else, then a to-do manager such as Reminders could be "utility software", but, in that case, utility software needs to be changed to reflect what "utility software" is (with, of course, citations to support the claim that "utility software" is that).
If the lede of utility software just "tries to give you a good idea as to what utility software is", it's failing spectacularly, if the intent is to include tools such as Reminder, or any other tool that was not designed specifically to "help analyze, configure, optimize or maintain a computer".
(And disk partitioning tools most definitely do fall within the definition of "utility software" given by the lede - which is not my definition, it's the definition put in there by whoever wrote that part of the article - as it's designed to help configure a computer. Similarly, system profilers fall within that definition, as they help analyze the computer.)
As for Reminders, it sounds as if the definition of "utility software" you're using, when you classify something a a "utility", has nothing to do with "[helping] analyze, configure, optimize or maintain a computer", although software that happens to be "designed to help analyze, configure, optimize or maintain a computer" isn't excluded from that category. If you have citations for your definition of "utility software", they would be useful for a change to "utility software" to reflect how the term is used.
(Note, however, that Reminders does support syncing to-do items with iCloud, and thus syncing with other OS X and iOS machines, and Apple has add-on software for Outlook to "keep mail, contacts, and calendars up to date between your iPhone, iPad, iPod touch, Mac, and Windows PC" and "share calendars and task lists".
I'm not sure what you mean by "advance alerts", but presumably it's something other than creating an item and setting it up to pop up a reminder at some date in the future. If it's referring to an advance alert of some scheduled event, that's supported, but by Calendar, as that's the tool for scheduled events; Calendar used to include to-do list support, but that was split off into Reminders in Mountain Lion.) Guy Harris (talk) 17:17, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
Actually, to be honest, I did read the first paragraph. It was yet another informal fallacy about web browsers that deliberately ignores the facts that we have web apps and web browsers are actually platforms. Not a good advertisement for the rest. Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 19:00, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
Either you believe that any program that could, in any way, be used to "help analyze, configure, optimize or maintain a computer" (whether it was designed for that purpose or not) is "utility software" or you don't.
If you do, then the fact that the program in question has an interpreter embedded in it capable of running programs it downloads from the Internet is irrelevant, as "any program" includes programs of that sort. It also raises the question of the relevance of being used to "help analyze, configure, optimize or maintain a computer", as, at that point, as I indicated, a lot of software that's quite different from most of the examples given on utility software becomes "utility software", and that page needs to be updated, with citations from reliable sources to support the claim that the new definition of "utility software" is used.
If you don't, then you either have a definition of "utility software" that still speaks of "[helping] analyze, configure, optimize or maintain a computer" or you don't.
If your definition speaks of "[helping] analyze, configure, optimize or maintain a computer", what additional criteria does it provide for determining which software that could, in any way, be used to "help analyze, configure, optimize or maintain a computer" (whether it was designed for that purpose or not) is "utility software" and which software isn't? Is "includes a JavaScript interpreter" one of those criteria?
If your definition doesn't speak of "[helping] analyze, configure, optimize or maintain a computer", what is it?
In either case, the utility software page needs to be updated for the new definition, with citations from reliable sources to support the claim that the new definition of "utility software" is used. Guy Harris (talk) 19:33, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

Status of your Library (computing) edit?[edit]

I am puzzled by the current status of Library (computing). The history shows that you were the last to do an edit, and that you undid revision 620219472 by, but when I enter Library (computing) in the search box I get the version. Is there a broken link somewhere?

BTW, the list of library examples matches IBM's use of the term library from OS/360 et al in the 1960's through z/OS in the present. I was going to add an additional comment pointing this out, but I want to first be sure that I edit the current version. Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul (talk) 19:42, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

What was the RAMAC price and capacity?[edit]

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Hard_disk_drive#An_End_To_The_RAMAC_Price_Duologue. Please help end the duologue on capacity and price of the IBM RAMAC Model 350 disk file. Thanks. Tom94022 (talk) 21:57, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

360/50 size[edit]

In your recent edit to IBM System/360, you gave a description of The Model 50 could have up to 256K of regular core, and 8 MB of "large", lower-speed, core. As you can see from IBM System/360 Model 50 Functional Characteristics, A22-6898-1, the 2050 was 64-512 KiB plus up to 8 MiB of LCS; it was the 2040 that was limited to 256 KiB. Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul (talk) 18:54, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

Easter egg (media) revert[edit]

Good revert, I'd pretty much completely misread that last edit, so reverting me and adding a source has saved my blushes. Must stop editing Wikipedia when I'm half asleep! Dylanfromthenorth (talk) 08:32, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

IA-32 deletion proposal[edit]

Hello! You might be interested in a discussion held on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/IA-32, so just though about bringing it to your attention. Any comments there would be highly appreciated! — Dsimic (talk | contribs) 22:12, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

Merry Christmas[edit]

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year! Password Saeba Ryo (talk) 13:01, 24 December 2014 (UTC)


I invite you to this page to discuss that should the consistency of talk pages of IA-32, x86 and x86-64 should be kept! Because I've seen you as one of most active editors there. So thank you! Remover remover (talk) 15:11, 29 December 2014 (UTC)

Virtual memory compression[edit]

Hello! Could you, please, have a look at the Virtual memory compression article, its history and a discussion on the talk page? That's a recently created article and I'd say that having a fresh pair of eyes would be highly beneficial. Any help would be highly appreciated! — Dsimic (talk | contribs) 06:11, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

Stylization of the "common name"[edit]

In January 2013 there was a "RfC on COMMONSTYLE proposal" at WT:AT in which you expressed an interest. FYI there is a similar debate taking place at the moment, see Wikipedia talk:Article titles#Stylization of the "common name" -- PBS-AWB (talk) 12:18, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

Transmeta Processor Does Not Have A MMU![edit]

Respectful Sir or Madam,


Transmeta Processors might not have hardware MMU, in other words, no segmentation found on Transmeta. I am not sure about it. Please refer more documents on Transmeta processors, further corrections might apply to this. Nothing more to bother you!

Computerfaner (talk) 14:30, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

Feels like yet another Janagewen sock. (Can we have the "nothing more" in writing, please?) Jeh (talk) 19:48, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
No, sorry! Because you are really a jerk to me, you prove that you are a jerk! I do feel a million sorry for you! (Here you is used for this jerk Jeh ) Computerfaner (talk) 23:35, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
Whoever he is, he's confused. Transmeta processors have no hardware capable of executing x86 machine code, so, if you're looking at them at the hardware level, they're not x86 processors. The only reason to discuss Transmeta processors on the x86 page is as x86 processors, which means that what matters is the combination of the hardware and the code morphing software, and the combination provides both segmentation and paging - otherwise, it wouldn't have been able to replace an x86. Guy Harris (talk) 00:36, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

Even though this reply is not for me, and people here are impolite. But it does not matter as always are. Frankly, Transmeta processor is not an x86 processor, but x86 platform processor. There is difference between processor and platform processor. There is no MMU in all the Transmeta processors, emulated by Morph platform emulator. I just leave you, Guy, a suggestion, take or drop as a junk. OK. Computerfaner (talk) 00:44, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

This is an interesting point. However, at the hardware level, current x86 processors aren't really x86 either. They implement x86 in microcode. Where do you draw the line? Jeh (talk) 02:52, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) Right, it's tough to draw a line somewhere as with that reasoning even Pentium 4 wouldn't be an x86 processor; however, "platform processor" isn't a term with a defined meaning. At the same time, Computerfaner, there are no reasons to be impolite. — Dsimic (talk | contribs) 13:39, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
Sorry, another babe in the woods. Enough! Computerfaner (talk) 15:54, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
Yeah, Computerfaner is almost definitely just another instance of Janagewen. — Dsimic (talk | contribs) 16:09, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
Given that, in his comment on Jeh's talk page, he pointed to an edit Janagewen made to a talk page, I think it's pretty clear that he's back (Dunning–Kruger effect and all). Guy Harris (talk) 20:01, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

If you guys really excellent, I wish Jeh would not use that stupid 46-bit question to confuse others for his own self purposes; Dsimic, not confuse with what an architecture is with what a processor is. And Guy Harris, I think you do not want to improve that table from the scratch, only made minor changes above to my little re-arrangement, only because you lack passion of it. If you are really good editors, you would not care about who the others are, only care about what they edited, correct or incorrect, reasonable or absurd. But what Jeh and Dsimic always did is to revert, set traps, report and use dirty words to describe what other editor did on Totally absurd! Guy Harris, you are excellent. Because you might understand what I wrote here and there about x86-64 processors, even though you know my English is bad enough. If you want to waste some bit more time, this might be just right for you. That is only my viewpoint about x86-64, with very bad English expression, but at least, I think it worthy reading.

I do not confuse myself with Transmeta processor, I met it and x86-64 about ten years ago. Transmeta does not have a MMU, and use completely different instruction set architecture, VLIW. One might treat the VLIW as the superscalar pipelines found on microarchitecture, and Morph as the front end decoder and MMU emulator. The combination of their both build a real processor, so Transmeta is only an engine, 32-bit address coming and going through this engine without protected or further processed at all. So there is no segmenting and paging mechanism within this processor. But that table is only devised to talk about the processors, not the platform or the whole system, so proper correction(s) might improve it. And the difference between Transmeta processors and Pentium 4 is that one could not dissection the front end from Pentium 4 processor and attach another decoder to enable it capable of executing PowerPC programs; but for Transmeta, another Morph could be programmed to bridge the gap between RISC and VLIW. Microcode might resemble to RISC code, but at least, the former are sealed into processor core, could not be utilized by programmers or assemblers. The microcode is often designed adapting x86 instructions to underlying execution cores, as for Core Microarchitecture, microcode could be used to potentially adapt 32-bit IA-32 instructions fully utilize the underlying 64-bit core (macro fusion). So Pentium 4 is still x86 processor, and Transmeta might be another thing to some people.

As to Platform Processor, processor is always used to support a specific platform, above which software or other components could find ways to survive. The combination of Transmeta processor and morph is just used to support a platform, IA-32 or x86 platform exactly. Above on it we see a x86 world, below it we see a completely different world. So I mention Transmeta processor as a x86 platform processor, and this morph is the firmware firming the above IA-32/x86 platform to the underlying VLIW processor, so it is a platform firmware. There is nothing ridiculous! At least, it is Dunning–Kruger effect.

Computerfaner (talk) 01:12, 18 January 2015 (UTC)

The table in question isn't "for" anything, as it mixes at least two different things.
There are multiple versions of the x86 instruction set architecture, with the first version being the one implemented by the 8086 and 8088, along with the 8087; floating point was optional with that version, as the 8087 was an add-on processsor. The next two versions were the ones implemented by the 80186, along with the 80187, and by the 80286, along with the 80287; the 80186/80188 version added some instructions but didn't add an MMU, while the 80286 version added an MMU. The third version is IA-32, introduced with the 80386 and 80387; the 80486 and Pentium added a few instructions to IA-32, but the first big change was MMX. Subsequent IA-32 processors introduced both small changes (such as the conditional moves added in the Pentium Pro) and significant changes such as 3DNow!, SSE, and subsequent extensions to SSE. Then came x86-64, to which various other additions were made. A table giving instruction set versions could be as simple as "8086/8088", "80186/80188", "80286", "IA-32", and "x86-64", or it could list the major additions, or it could list each change. Intel's and AMD's competition would mean that it's not a simple table with a total order based on anything other than chronological order. If processors appeared in the table at all, they would be listed along with the particular version of the instruction set for which they're capable of processing code; Transmeta's processors are capable of processing IA-32 code in its entirety, including segmentation and paging, even if they don't do it by doing the segmentation purely in the hardware, so they would be listed along with other IA-32 processors with similar capabilities, including indicating that they support a 32-bit (paged) linear address space and a (14+32)-bit segmented address space. Its internal characteristics would be completely irrelevant in this table, just as it's irrelevant whether a processor from Intel or AMD is superscalar or not, or breaks instructions into uops or not, as that's not visible at the level of operating system or application code.
There are also multiple generations of processors capable of processing x86 code; a table listing those would be a bit more complicated - they'd obviously be divided by the version of the instruction set for which they're capable of processing code, but they'd also be divided by implementation techniques, e.g. the original Pentium being superscalar but in-order, the Pentium Pro being the first to do the micro-op-based out-of-order superscalar stuff, and the Transmeta processors using interpretation and binary-to-binary translation rather than simple decoding and execution or decoding-into-microops and execution. That table would have even less of a total order, and should probably point elsewhere for the implementation-independent details such as 16-bit-without-MMU vs. 16-bit-with-MMU vs. 32-bit vs. 64-bit.
Further discussion of the table on the x86 page should take place on that page; if anybody makes a comment about the contents of that page in this thread on this page, I'll reply to it on Talk:x86 and point back to the start of the discussion here. Guy Harris (talk) 10:41, 18 January 2015 (UTC)

Cf. Z3 article[edit]

See here Talk:Z3_(computer)#.40Guy_Harris.2C_apropos_direct_link_to_Turing-completeness, (talk) 10:03, 19 January 2015 (UTC)


Dear Guy Harris,

I am so glad that I had the honor to talk on x86, x86-64 and architecture with you on, and through which I do really practice my English writing skills on computing. But every road has its end. I had already decided if my user account locked globally I would leave. Now that is the time to say goodbye. Even though I do not know you at all, but I still wish you everything goes well! And another Happy New Year to you! Have a good day! Bye!

Yours, sincerely


January 26th, 2015 — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 12:10, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

More or less pager for man[edit]

Hej Harris,

1) So many newcomers to POSIX systems asked me about how to get out of man, that I thought that this information would be very valuable in the Wikipedia article about the man utility. You must realise that seasoned Unix programmers do not generally read wikipedia articles about the man utility. It is exactly the people who are not very familiar with POSIX systems that seek this information. And they really do not no how to get out of man once they get into it.

2) Manual page for linux says "By default, man uses /usr/bin/less -is". Statistics tells us that if Linux uses less than this is "typical" in this world. Edit: I have just checked that OS X man pager also defaults to less. Linux and OSX together should be more than majority of the installed *Unix* systems in this world.

However, I am willing to agree on your formulation as long as you add the phrase "typically one has to press q to exit from man". What is wrong with this? It is valid for both more and less.

Bakkedal (talk) 21:13, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

Request for comment[edit]

Hi. I noticed that "Comparison of current ARM cores" is a subset of "Comparison of ARMv7-A cores", except for the ARM11 column, thus I consider it redundant and put in a request to DELETE the "Comparison of current ARM cores" article. If you are interested, please comment at "Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Comparison of current ARM cores". Thanks in advance. • SbmeirowTalk • 20:40, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

About core2' in x86 article[edit]

To correct this core2, woodcrest and nehalem are support 40bit large physical address extension which is within em64t's specification/x86-64 implement. Sandy bridge and has well are support 44bit physical addresss. Only Prescott/cedar mill are 36bit from ia32e. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 21:30, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

Program counter[edit]

I don't mind your edit here, but am baffled at your Change Summary that "there was a time when, in many CPUs, it wasn't binary." Trinary? Decimal? Really "many CPUs"? Fill me in! Spike-from-NH (talk)

(talk page stalker) Yes, there were decimal CPUs. The IBM 1401 is one of the more famous examples. It was one of the best-selling computers of its day. Jeh (talk) 17:32, 18 March 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for the link. Interesting read; I stand corrected. Spike-from-NH (talk) 11:18, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Two infoboxes[edit]

Hi there! I noticed you split one infoboxes for Photos (application) into two. I was just wondering if perhaps that edit should be reverted. It seems to me that Photos is essentially the same app on both platforms, but more fully featured on Mac. There isn't enough differences between the apps to warrant two infoboxes, in my opinion. I think I might do a general cleanup of all these Apple-related articles, so I could also change the other similar articles (like Calendar (Mac OS)) for consistency. Please see FaceTime for an example of how I'd structure the article. Thanks! StewdioMACK Talk page 05:32, 11 April 2015 (UTC)

Program counter[edit]

Your edits here don't fit at all in a section that "assumes that what a computer does is execute a usually linear sequence of instructions," as the IBM 650, as you describe it, clearly does not. The "'next instruction address' field in all instructions" — while doing the same thing a program counter does, is not a program counter (is not a counter) at all. This alternative might fit somewhere in the article, but it is not an "equivalent mechanism." Spike-from-NH (talk) 04:24, 15 April 2015 (UTC)


This edit summary - and all others like it - made me smile. Thanks for reverting the IP (I've blocked them as a sock) and for the morning amusement. :) Acalamari 08:51, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

OS X Yosemite screenshot[edit]

Thank you for your fast reply! I am a noob here, sorry. I just uploaded the screenshot of OS X Yosemite 10.10.3 on Imgur (1440x900), here it is: , and I mean the little like thumbnail under Versions|Version 10.10: "Yosemite" Once again, thanks, and sorry if I'm posting this in the wrong place, I'm a noob here. Thank you for your time! :D — Preceding unsigned comment added by JohnyDog107 (talkcontribs) 21:37, 7 May 2015 (UTC)



Hi, I have nominated Måns win at Eurovision for a mention at ITN. Take a look. Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates.--BabbaQ (talk) 09:53, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

Denunciation at the computer level.[edit]

I've been reading too much Jack Vance, where murderous intentions are discussed ever so politely. So indeed an array bound error would be denounced by the B6700 operating system ("Index error" as I recall), and then if this report became known to other humans, by them also. I recall a chess-playing prog. that Ted Stallknecht at Victoria university had obtained from somewhere and it would fail some twenty seconds of crunching in, by which time it had devised all manner of data structure linkages and nobody could figure out just why. The original author(s) were inaccessible. I also recall being employed one holiday to prepare documentation containing a list of all such error messages with explanations and hints on how to discover more, etc. Aside from compiler language syntax complaints, there were very few such messages so only a few pages resulted. By dreadful contrast, IBM mainframe systems presented you with a set of shelves packed with manuals describing endless complaints from endless utilities. NickyMcLean (talk) 10:54, 28 May 2015 (UTC)