Hello happy tax payers...

I'm experimenting an interesting exercise.
I have a pdf file that I need to process to build an EXCEL file to
perform some sorting
pdf file has following format:

first_name
last_name
wedding_name
(empty_zone)
birth_date
birth_addr
birth_town
birth_country
addr1
addr2
postal_code
town

all fields may *not* be used
all of this on four lines and three colums in the .pdf
fortunately a cut/paste to Word gives a one column result
So, I copied the resulting file in text format to VMS and did some DCL
to produce a comma-separated file to be imported back to EXCEL, one
line per person. But I encounter some synchronization issues...

Should someone around here did (is that good English?) something
similar, feel free to mail
didier dot morandi at gmail dot com

Many thanks !

DTL DCL same fight
and the answer is... 42

DTL wrote:
> Hello happy tax payers...
> 
> I'm experimenting an interesting exercise.
> I have a pdf file that I need to process to build an EXCEL file to
> perform some sorting
> pdf file has following format:
> 
> first_name
> last_name
> wedding_name
> (empty_zone)
> birth_date
> birth_addr
> birth_town
> birth_country
> addr1
> addr2
> postal_code
> town
> 
> all fields may *not* be used
> all of this on four lines and three colums in the .pdf
> fortunately a cut/paste to Word gives a one column result
> So, I copied the resulting file in text format to VMS and did some DCL
> to produce a comma-separated file to be imported back to EXCEL, one
> line per person. But I encounter some synchronization issues...
> 
> Should someone around here did (is that good English?) something
> similar, feel free to mail
> didier dot morandi at gmail dot com
> 
> Many thanks !
> 
> DTL DCL same fight
> and the answer is... 42
> 

I have written some PDF parsing routines in OpenVMS Basic for my
typesetting system. If you can send me a sample, I'll take a look to see
if they could be adapted for you. Is this a one time effort or will it
be ongoing?

Jeff Coffield
http://www.digitalsynergyinc.com
http://www.keepmeuptodate.net

On 13 nov, 17:37, "Jeffrey H. Coffield"
<jeff...@digitalsynergyinc.com> wrote:

> I have written some PDF parsing routines in OpenVMS Basic for my
> typesetting system. If you can send me a sample, I'll take a look to see
> if they could be adapted for you. Is this a one time effort or will it
> be ongoing?

One time BIG effort (more than 220 000 data to process)
send me your email address and I send you a sample.
thanks a lot.

DTL wrote:
> Hello happy tax payers...
> 
> I'm experimenting an interesting exercise.
> I have a pdf file that I need to process to build an EXCEL file to
> perform some sorting
> pdf file has following format:
> 
> first_name
> last_name
> wedding_name
> (empty_zone)
> birth_date
> birth_addr
> birth_town
> birth_country
> addr1
> addr2
> postal_code
> town
> 
> all fields may *not* be used
> all of this on four lines and three colums in the .pdf
> fortunately a cut/paste to Word gives a one column result
> So, I copied the resulting file in text format to VMS and did some DCL
> to produce a comma-separated file to be imported back to EXCEL, one
> line per person. But I encounter some synchronization issues...
> 
> Should someone around here did (is that good English?) something
Not good English!
s/did/have done/

But don't feel bad!  There are native speakers of English who do not 
write as well as you.  You may see their posts here from time to time! :-)

> similar, feel free to mail
> didier dot morandi at gmail dot com
> 
> Many thanks !
> 
> DTL DCL same fight
> and the answer is... 42
> 

The Xpdf package should build under VMS. http://www.foolabs.com/xpdf/download.html
The pdftotext program can extract text from pdf.
Ghostscript should also build under VMS http://ghostscript.com/releases/
and the ps2ascii script can extract text from ps and pdf.

William <william.bader@gmail.com> wrote:
> The Xpdf package should build under VMS. http://www.foolabs.com/xpdf/download.html

A ready-to-compile source package and pre-built kits for Alpha V7.3-2 and
I64 V8.3-1H1 are available from my home page.

> The pdftotext program can extract text from pdf.
> Ghostscript should also build under VMS http://ghostscript.com/releases/
> and the ps2ascii script can extract text from ps and pdf.

cu,
   Martin
-- 
One OS to rule them all       | Martin Vorlaender  |  OpenVMS rules!
One OS to find them           | work: mv@pdv-systeme.de
One OS to bring them all      |   http://vms.pdv-systeme.de/users/martinv/
And in the Darkness bind them.| home: martin.vorlaender@t-online.de

On 13 nov, 19:42, "Richard B. Gilbert" <rgilber...@comcast.net> wrote:

> Not good English!
> s/did/have done/

u mean

s/did/have done/w/notype :-)

Thanks to all, I'll cope.

Just found a HUGE bug in one of my procs.
A text field read from the main data file contained two single quotes
just before three chars : I, F and a space
so, the proc took the "IF" as a statement instead of a value and
produced a
%CLI-E-INVIFNEST, invalid IF-THEN-ELSE nesting structure or data
inconsistency
LOL

I spent hours, well maybe less, to double check all my condition code
but found no missing ENDIF.
Obviously... :-)

On Nov 13, 10:31=A0am, DTL <didier.mora...@gmail.com> wrote:
:
> I'm experimenting an interesting exercise.
> I have a pdf file that I need to process to build an EXCEL file to
:
> So, I copied the resulting file in text format to VMS and did some DCL
> to produce a comma-separated file to be imported back to EXCEL, one

Judging by the various recent topics, you are digging yourself in
nicely.
That's all good and well if you like to experiment and fool around.

But if you want to solve the problem, then forget about OpenVMS for
this problem and grab PERL or similar tools to muck with this on the
PC.
You'll find that learning PERL, if you do not know it already, comes
in mightly handy on OpenVMS as well.

Cheers,
Hein

Hein RMS van den Heuvel schrieb:

> But if you want to solve the problem, then forget about OpenVMS for
> this problem and grab PERL or similar tools to muck with this on the
> PC.

It is always kind of amusing how on one hand people
are bemoaning the neglection of VMS in the market place
and on the other hand recommend PCs for just about every piece of 
practical work.
Why should HP market VMS if even VMS-aware customers prefer PCs?

Michael Kraemer wrote:

> It is always kind of amusing how on one hand people
> are bemoaning the neglection of VMS in the market place
> and on the other hand recommend PCs for just about every piece of 
> practical work.

There comes a time when the ease of doing something on another platform
combined with the difficulty of doing same thing on VMS will overcome
your religious loyalty to VMS.

In article <hdpvuo$pi7$00$1@news.t-online.com>, Michael Kraemer <M.Kraemer@gsi.de> writes:
>Hein RMS van den Heuvel schrieb:
>
>> But if you want to solve the problem, then forget about OpenVMS for
>> this problem and grab PERL or similar tools to muck with this on the
>> PC.
>
>It is always kind of amusing how on one hand people
>are bemoaning the neglection of VMS in the market place
>and on the other hand recommend PCs for just about every piece of 
>practical work.
>Why should HP market VMS if even VMS-aware customers prefer PCs?

Slander!


-- 
VAXman- A Bored Certified VMS Kernel Mode Hacker    VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)ORG

  http://www.quirkfactory.com/popart/asskey/eqn2.png
  
  "Well my son, life is like a beanstalk, isn't it?"

Michael Kraemer wrote:
> 
> Hein RMS van den Heuvel schrieb:
> 
> > But if you want to solve the problem, then forget about OpenVMS for
> > this problem and grab PERL or similar tools to muck with this on the
> > PC.
> 
> It is always kind of amusing how on one hand people
> are bemoaning the neglection of VMS in the market place
> and on the other hand recommend PCs for just about every piece of
> practical work.
> Why should HP market VMS if even VMS-aware customers prefer PCs?

Not a question of "preference".

Not a personal attack on you, but:

"It's the applications, stupid!"

If there were a suitable set of products available to run on VMS, folks
certainly would do that.

D.J.D.

David J Dachtera wrote:
> Michael Kraemer wrote:
>> Hein RMS van den Heuvel schrieb:
>>> But if you want to solve the problem, then forget about OpenVMS for
>>> this problem and grab PERL or similar tools to muck with this on the
>>> PC.
>> It is always kind of amusing how on one hand people
>> are bemoaning the neglection of VMS in the market place
>> and on the other hand recommend PCs for just about every piece of
>> practical work.
>> Why should HP market VMS if even VMS-aware customers prefer PCs?
> 
> Not a question of "preference".
> 
> Not a personal attack on you, but:
> 
> "It's the applications, stupid!"
> 
> If there were a suitable set of products available to run on VMS, folks
> certainly would do that.

But note that lack of applications will be a problem for
many other potential users as well.

Arne

Arne Vajh�j wrote:
> David J Dachtera wrote:
>> Michael Kraemer wrote:
>>> Hein RMS van den Heuvel schrieb:
>>>> But if you want to solve the problem, then forget about OpenVMS for
>>>> this problem and grab PERL or similar tools to muck with this on the
>>>> PC.
>>> It is always kind of amusing how on one hand people
>>> are bemoaning the neglection of VMS in the market place
>>> and on the other hand recommend PCs for just about every piece of
>>> practical work.
>>> Why should HP market VMS if even VMS-aware customers prefer PCs?
>>
>> Not a question of "preference".
>>
>> Not a personal attack on you, but:
>>
>> "It's the applications, stupid!"
>>
>> If there were a suitable set of products available to run on VMS, folks
>> certainly would do that.
> 
> But note that lack of applications will be a problem for
> many other potential users as well.
> 
> Arne

Frequently a PC is the best tool for the job.  You can sneer at the 
"click and drool" interface but millions use it and it works for them!
Frequently the PC or paper and pencil are the only tools available.

There are tasks that cannot be easily accomplished using Windows and 
that's the reason I keep both VMS and Solaris systems around and wasting 
electricity!  None of the three is the best tool for EVERY job.

David J Dachtera schrieb:

> 
> Not a question of "preference".
> 
> Not a personal attack on you, but:
> 
> "It's the applications, stupid!"
> 
> If there were a suitable set of products available to run on VMS, folks
> certainly would do that.

And why don't "folks" just create the apps?
I mean, that's how they do it in Linux-Land.

Richard B. Gilbert schrieb:

> Frequently a PC is the best tool for the job.  You can sneer at the 
> "click and drool" interface but millions use it and it works for them!
> Frequently the PC or paper and pencil are the only tools available.
> 
> There are tasks that cannot be easily accomplished using Windows and 
> that's the reason I keep both VMS and Solaris systems around and wasting 
> electricity!  None of the three is the best tool for EVERY job.

The majority of people (and customers) don't want to have three
vastly different systems. They standardize on the one they
use for reading mail, and everything else has to follow.

Michael Kraemer wrote:
> David J Dachtera schrieb:
> 
>>
>> Not a question of "preference".
>>
>> Not a personal attack on you, but:
>>
>> "It's the applications, stupid!"
>>
>> If there were a suitable set of products available to run on VMS, folks
>> certainly would do that.
> 
> And why don't "folks" just create the apps?
> I mean, that's how they do it in Linux-Land.
> 
> 

At one point there were something like 5,000 applications available for 
VAX/VMS.  DEC published a book an inch and a half thick that listed them 
  together with contact information for getting the software.  My copy, 
sadly, has vanished. . . .

In article <4sWdnd196oM7xJzWnZ2dnUVZ_qidnZ2d@giganews.com>,
	"Richard B. Gilbert" <rgilbert88@comcast.net> writes:
> Michael Kraemer wrote:
>> David J Dachtera schrieb:
>> 
>>>
>>> Not a question of "preference".
>>>
>>> Not a personal attack on you, but:
>>>
>>> "It's the applications, stupid!"
>>>
>>> If there were a suitable set of products available to run on VMS, folks
>>> certainly would do that.
>> 
>> And why don't "folks" just create the apps?
>> I mean, that's how they do it in Linux-Land.
>> 
>> 
> 
> At one point there were something like 5,000 applications available for 
> VAX/VMS.  DEC published a book an inch and a half thick that listed them 
>   together with contact information for getting the software.  My copy, 
> sadly, has vanished. . . .
 
I don't know about that.  My copy of the VMS Software Sourcebook is not
even an inch thick.  My PDP-11 Software Sourcebook, on the other hand,
is two volumes and 2 3/4 inches thick.  

What does this tell us?  :-)

bill
 

-- 
Bill Gunshannon          |  de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n.  Three wolves
billg999@cs.scranton.edu |  and a sheep voting on what's for dinner.
University of Scranton   |
Scranton, Pennsylvania   |         #include <std.disclaimer.h>   

"Bill Gunshannon" <billg999@cs.uofs.edu> wrote in message 
news:7mdcauF3h08hvU2@mid.individual.net...


> I don't know about that.  My copy of the VMS Software Sourcebook is not
> even an inch thick.  My PDP-11 Software Sourcebook, on the other hand,
> is two volumes and 2 3/4 inches thick.
>
> What does this tell us?  :-)

That the page size on the PDP-11 was smaller than the VAX ;) 

Bill Gunshannon wrote:
> In article <4sWdnd196oM7xJzWnZ2dnUVZ_qidnZ2d@giganews.com>,
> 	"Richard B. Gilbert" <rgilbert88@comcast.net> writes:
>> Michael Kraemer wrote:
>>> David J Dachtera schrieb:
>>>
>>>> Not a question of "preference".
>>>>
>>>> Not a personal attack on you, but:
>>>>
>>>> "It's the applications, stupid!"
>>>>
>>>> If there were a suitable set of products available to run on VMS, folks
>>>> certainly would do that.
>>> And why don't "folks" just create the apps?
>>> I mean, that's how they do it in Linux-Land.
>>>
>>>
>> At one point there were something like 5,000 applications available for 
>> VAX/VMS.  DEC published a book an inch and a half thick that listed them 
>>   together with contact information for getting the software.  My copy, 
>> sadly, has vanished. . . .
>  
> I don't know about that.  My copy of the VMS Software Sourcebook is not
> even an inch thick.  My PDP-11 Software Sourcebook, on the other hand,
> is two volumes and 2 3/4 inches thick.  
> 
> What does this tell us?  :-)
> 
> bill
>  
> 

Perhaps that the PDP family has been around several years longer than 
the VAX/Alpha/Itanic "family".  Perhaps also that PDP-11 is far less 
expensive than VAX/Alpha/Itanic.

Richard Brodie wrote:
> "Bill Gunshannon" <billg999@cs.uofs.edu> wrote in message 
> news:7mdcauF3h08hvU2@mid.individual.net...
> 
> 
>> I don't know about that.  My copy of the VMS Software Sourcebook is not
>> even an inch thick.  My PDP-11 Software Sourcebook, on the other hand,
>> is two volumes and 2 3/4 inches thick.
>>
>> What does this tell us?  :-)
> 
> That the page size on the PDP-11 was smaller than the VAX ;) 
> 
> 

ROTFLMAO!

In article <hdrub9$b2n$1@south.jnrs.ja.net>,
	"Richard Brodie" <R.Brodie@rl.ac.uk> writes:
> 
> "Bill Gunshannon" <billg999@cs.uofs.edu> wrote in message 
> news:7mdcauF3h08hvU2@mid.individual.net...
> 
> 
>> I don't know about that.  My copy of the VMS Software Sourcebook is not
>> even an inch thick.  My PDP-11 Software Sourcebook, on the other hand,
>> is two volumes and 2 3/4 inches thick.
>>
>> What does this tell us?  :-)
> 
> That the page size on the PDP-11 was smaller than the VAX ;) 
 
Bzzzzttt.  Wrong answer.  But thank you for playing.

The books both have the same page size and used the same size fonts.
Probably used the same typesetting package.  :-)

bill
 

-- 
Bill Gunshannon          |  de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n.  Three wolves
billg999@cs.scranton.edu |  and a sheep voting on what's for dinner.
University of Scranton   |
Scranton, Pennsylvania   |         #include <std.disclaimer.h>   

In article <hdrub9$b2n$1@south.jnrs.ja.net>, Richard Brodie
<R.Brodie@rl.ac.uk> wrote:

> "Bill Gunshannon" <billg999@cs.uofs.edu> wrote in message 
> news:7mdcauF3h08hvU2@mid.individual.net...
> 
> 
> > I don't know about that.  My copy of the VMS Software Sourcebook is not
> > even an inch thick.  My PDP-11 Software Sourcebook, on the other hand,
> > is two volumes and 2 3/4 inches thick.
> >
> > What does this tell us?  :-)
> 
> That the page size on the PDP-11 was smaller than the VAX ;) 

Nice one! That joke is well above PAR

-- 
To de-mung my e-mail address:- fsnospam$elliott$$
PGP Fingerprint: 1A96 3CF7 637F 896B C810  E199 7E5C A9E4 8E59 E248

In article <7mdgeeF3h6o8qU1@mid.individual.net>, billg999@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes:
> In article <hdrub9$b2n$1@south.jnrs.ja.net>,
> 	"Richard Brodie" <R.Brodie@rl.ac.uk> writes:
>> 
>> That the page size on the PDP-11 was smaller than the VAX ;) 
>  
> Bzzzzttt.  Wrong answer.  But thank you for playing.

   Yes, systems did have the same size pages.  It was the nonpaged pool 
   that was so much different RSX folks refered to VMS' pool as nonpaged 
   ocean.

   But I only recall VMS documents on small pages in the small, impossible 
   to purchase binders.  Part of the orange shelves (aka Chinese Red),
   IIRC.

In article <tiZRnviN6zgR@eisner.encompasserve.org>,
	koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) writes:
> In article <7mdgeeF3h6o8qU1@mid.individual.net>, billg999@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes:
>> In article <hdrub9$b2n$1@south.jnrs.ja.net>,
>> 	"Richard Brodie" <R.Brodie@rl.ac.uk> writes:
>>> 
>>> That the page size on the PDP-11 was smaller than the VAX ;) 
>>  
>> Bzzzzttt.  Wrong answer.  But thank you for playing.
> 
>    Yes, systems did have the same size pages.  It was the nonpaged pool 
>    that was so much different RSX folks refered to VMS' pool as nonpaged 
>    ocean.
> 
>    But I only recall VMS documents on small pages in the small, impossible 
>    to purchase binders.  Part of the orange shelves (aka Chinese Red),
>    IIRC.

And once again you try to steer away from the discussion when it is
obvious that things were not as rosy for VMS as for other OSes, even
in DEC's own camp.

We were talking about Software Sourcebooks.  They wre Paperback sized
listings of applications (Remember applications?  It's what really
sells systems!)  And, once again someone tried to claim that VMS had
the most when in fact, it really appears that VARS started leaving the
DEC Camp about the time the PDP-11 fell out of favor.

Hmmm...  Another project for a rainy day once I get the chance to unpack
all my stuff again.  A number of the packages in the PDP-11 Sourcebook
have a comment saying "also available on VAX".  While this does not
necessarily mean "on VMS" it would be interesting to make a list of
all of these and compare it to the VAX Sourcebook to see how many of
them dropped the VAX version at the same time they dropped the PDP-11
version.

bill
 

-- 
Bill Gunshannon          |  de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n.  Three wolves
billg999@cs.scranton.edu |  and a sheep voting on what's for dinner.
University of Scranton   |
Scranton, Pennsylvania   |         #include <std.disclaimer.h>   

In article <tiZRnviN6zgR@eisner.encompasserve.org>,
 koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) wrote:

> In article <7mdgeeF3h6o8qU1@mid.individual.net>, billg999@cs.uofs.edu (Bill 
> Gunshannon) writes:
> > In article <hdrub9$b2n$1@south.jnrs.ja.net>,
> > 	"Richard Brodie" <R.Brodie@rl.ac.uk> writes:
> >> 
> >> That the page size on the PDP-11 was smaller than the VAX ;) 
> >  
> > Bzzzzttt.  Wrong answer.  But thank you for playing.
> 
>    Yes, systems did have the same size pages.  It was the nonpaged pool 
>    that was so much different RSX folks refered to VMS' pool as nonpaged 
>    ocean.
> 
>    But I only recall VMS documents on small pages in the small, impossible 
>    to purchase binders.  Part of the orange shelves (aka Chinese Red),
>    IIRC.

You think you had problem getting those...

On this side of the pond we had problems getting hold of the US sized 4 
hole binders, and the paper punches to go with them.

-- 
Paul Sture
c.o.v

In article <hdqrfs$va$03$1@news.t-online.com>,
 Michael Kraemer <M.Kraemer@gsi.de> wrote:

> Richard B. Gilbert schrieb:
> 
> > Frequently a PC is the best tool for the job.  You can sneer at the 
> > "click and drool" interface but millions use it and it works for them!
> > Frequently the PC or paper and pencil are the only tools available.
> > 
> > There are tasks that cannot be easily accomplished using Windows and 
> > that's the reason I keep both VMS and Solaris systems around and wasting 
> > electricity!  None of the three is the best tool for EVERY job.
> 
> The majority of people (and customers) don't want to have three
> vastly different systems. They standardize on the one they
> use for reading mail, and everything else has to follow.

Unfortunately that mentality has managers suggesting Windows for 
production control systems.

-- 
Paul Sture
c.o.v

On 18 nov, 17:07, Paul Sture <paul.nos...@sture.ch> wrote:

.../..

> --
> Paul Sture
> c.o.v

Hello mister Sture, no more in Switzerland ?

Michael Kraemer wrote:
> 
> David J Dachtera schrieb:
> 
> >
> > Not a question of "preference".
> >
> > Not a personal attack on you, but:
> >
> > "It's the applications, stupid!"
> >
> > If there were a suitable set of products available to run on VMS, folks
> > certainly would do that.
> 
> And why don't "folks" just create the apps?
> I mean, that's how they do it in Linux-Land.

In VMSland, "users" typically have more productive things to do than
cobble together hacked-up app.'s because none currently exist.

It may be more accurate to say that the app.'s exist, just not where you
need them (WhineBloze only or UN*X only or ...).

Rather the same reason why there were few competitors for the GUI market
outside of M$ and GEOworks. 

I suspect the same is the reason why no FreeVMS project has ever
progressed to the V1.x level.

D.J.D.

On Nov 18, 4:07=C2=A0pm, Paul Sture <paul.nos...@sture.ch> wrote:
> In article <hdqrfs$va$0...@news.t-online.com>,
> =C2=A0Michael Kraemer <M.Krae...@gsi.de> wrote:
>
> > Richard B. Gilbert schrieb:
>
> > > Frequently a PC is the best tool for the job. =C2=A0You can sneer at =
the
> > > "click and drool" interface but millions use it and it works for them=
!
> > > Frequently the PC or paper and pencil are the only tools available.
>
> > > There are tasks that cannot be easily accomplished using Windows and
> > > that's the reason I keep both VMS and Solaris systems around and wast=
ing
> > > electricity! =C2=A0None of the three is the best tool for EVERY job.
>
> > The majority of people (and customers) don't want to have three
> > vastly different systems. They standardize on the one they
> > use for reading mail, and everything else has to follow.
>
> Unfortunately that mentality has managers suggesting Windows for
> production control systems.
>
> --
> Paul Sture
> c.o.v

Of course one size fits all.

Just look outside the IT world. One size always fits all. You don't
get civil engineers building different kinds of bridges depending on
circumstances, production engineers always use the same kind of
machine tool regardless of requirements, motor vehicle engineers
always use the same engines regardless of application, there's only
one kind of steel and engineers use it in all known applications, etc.
A plumber only ever uses one kind of pipe, an electrician always uses
the same kind of cable whether it is for general duties or whether it
needs to be fire resistant, a carpenter's toolbox only ever has one
tool in it.

That's the way it works isn't it?

Or is it only "one size fits all" when the PHBs and their "Powerpoint
culture" have been allowed to take over.

""PowerPoint was used to =E2=80=98demonstrate=E2=80=99 engineering rather t=
han explain
a proper technical analysis. When engineering analysis and risk
assessments are condensed to =EF=AC=81t on a standard form or overhead slid=
e,
information is inevitably lost. ... PowerPoint can ... be dangerous,
mesmerising, and lead to sloppy (or nil) thinking.".

Those are not my words, they are the words of the recently published
UK Government report into the death of 14 servicemen in an RAF Nimrod
aircraft crash in Afghanistan in 2006, which turns out to be a result
of a whole trail of avoidable errors and unnecessary shortcuts, for
which as yet no one has been prosecuted. In fact for a traditional UK
Government inquiry, the report is exceedingly scathing and even names
individuals.

But as many of us round here know from our own experience,
inappropriate use of "Powerpoint culture" extends far, far beyond the
military and their suppliers.

You could also argue that the big commercial players in the IT game
have largely built up a self-preserving Microsoft-dependent
monoculture, but that's a different subject for a different day.

Ref: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/oct/29/nimrod-crash-inqui=
ry-raf-afghanistan

Paul Sture wrote:
> In article <tiZRnviN6zgR@eisner.encompasserve.org>,
>  koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) wrote:
> 
>> In article <7mdgeeF3h6o8qU1@mid.individual.net>, billg999@cs.uofs.edu (Bill 
>> Gunshannon) writes:
>>> In article <hdrub9$b2n$1@south.jnrs.ja.net>,
>>> 	"Richard Brodie" <R.Brodie@rl.ac.uk> writes:
>>>> That the page size on the PDP-11 was smaller than the VAX ;) 
>>>  
>>> Bzzzzttt.  Wrong answer.  But thank you for playing.
>>    Yes, systems did have the same size pages.  It was the nonpaged pool 
>>    that was so much different RSX folks refered to VMS' pool as nonpaged 
>>    ocean.
>>
>>    But I only recall VMS documents on small pages in the small, impossible 
>>    to purchase binders.  Part of the orange shelves (aka Chinese Red),
>>    IIRC.
> 
> You think you had problem getting those...
> 
> On this side of the pond we had problems getting hold of the US sized 4 
> hole binders, and the paper punches to go with them.
> 

Four hole??????????  Three hole binders are standard and generally 
available in the U.S.  I don't believe that I have ever seen a four hole 
binder or heard of one.

On Wed, 18 Nov 2009 16:06:45 -0500, Richard B. Gilbert wrote:

>> On this side of the pond we had problems getting hold of the US sized 4
>> hole binders, and the paper punches to go with them.
>> 
> Four hole??????????  Three hole binders are standard and generally
> available in the U.S.  I don't believe that I have ever seen a four hole
> binder or heard of one.

http://www.viking-direct.co.uk/catalog/catalogSku.do?pr=Q2D&id=56030-WE

I think the V4/V5 documenttaion came in them.

-- 
Use the BIG mirror service in the UK:
 http://www.mirrorservice.org

Bob Eager wrote:
> On Wed, 18 Nov 2009 16:06:45 -0500, Richard B. Gilbert wrote:
> 
>>> On this side of the pond we had problems getting hold of the US sized 4
>>> hole binders, and the paper punches to go with them.
>>>
>> Four hole??????????  Three hole binders are standard and generally
>> available in the U.S.  I don't believe that I have ever seen a four hole
>> binder or heard of one.
> 
> http://www.viking-direct.co.uk/catalog/catalogSku.do?pr=Q2D&id=56030-WE
> 
> I think the V4/V5 documenttaion came in them.
> 

The V3, V4, and V5 documentation sets were all drilled for three ring 
binders here in the U.S.  It's possible that four hole binders are or 
were in use somewhere in the world.  If they were ever used here they 
were not common!

On Nov 18, 12:08=C2=A0pm, John Wallace <johnwalla...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
> Or is it only "one size fits all" when the PHBs and their "Powerpoint
> culture" have been allowed to take over.
>
> ""PowerPoint was used to =E2=80=98demonstrate=E2=80=99 engineering rather=
 than explain
> a proper technical analysis. When engineering analysis and risk
> assessments are condensed to =EF=AC=81t on a standard form or overhead sl=
ide,
> information is inevitably lost. ... PowerPoint can ... be dangerous,
> mesmerising, and lead to sloppy (or nil) thinking.".
>
> Those are not my words, they are the words of the recently published
> UK Government report into the death of 14 servicemen in an RAF Nimrod
> aircraft crash in Afghanistan in 2006, which turns out to be a result
> of a whole trail of avoidable errors and unnecessary shortcuts, for
> which as yet no one has been prosecuted. In fact for a traditional UK
> Government inquiry, the report is exceedingly scathing and even names
> individuals.
>
> But as many of us round here know from our own experience,
> inappropriate use of "Powerpoint culture" extends far, far beyond the
> military and their suppliers.
>
> You could also argue that the big commercial players in the IT game
> have largely built up a self-preserving Microsoft-dependent
> monoculture, but that's a different subject for a different day.
>
> Ref:http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/oct/29/nimrod-crash-inqu=
....

While the event described in your example is sad and grim, John, after
seeing a youtube video of Doug Zongker's "Chicken Chicken Chicken"
Powerpoint presentation I can not help but chuckle anytime someone
mentions Powerpoint.

For anyone who hasn't seen it and has suffered through way too many
tedious PPT presentations:
-> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DyL_-1d9OSdk

On Nov 18, 3:43=A0pm, "Richard B. Gilbert" <rgilber...@comcast.net>
wrote:
> Bob Eager wrote:
> > On Wed, 18 Nov 2009 16:06:45 -0500, Richard B. Gilbert wrote:
>
> >>> On this side of the pond we had problems getting hold of the US sized=
 4
> >>> hole binders, and the paper punches to go with them.
>
> >> Four hole?????????? =A0Three hole binders are standard and generally
> >> available in the U.S. =A0I don't believe that I have ever seen a four =
hole
> >> binder or heard of one.
>
> >http://www.viking-direct.co.uk/catalog/catalogSku.do?pr=3DQ2D&id=3D56030=
-WE
>
> > I think the V4/V5 documenttaion came in them.
>
> The V3, V4, and V5 documentation sets were all drilled for three ring
> binders here in the U.S. =A0It's possible that four hole binders are or
> were in use somewhere in the world. =A0If they were ever used here they
> were not common!

ISTRC some documentation updates came with 5 (or maybe 7) hole
"universal" punches. But, my wall sets are long gone and many brain
cells have died since then so I could be remembering some other
vendor.

Doug Phillips wrote:
> On Nov 18, 3:43 pm, "Richard B. Gilbert" <rgilber...@comcast.net>
> wrote:
>> Bob Eager wrote:
>>> On Wed, 18 Nov 2009 16:06:45 -0500, Richard B. Gilbert wrote:
>>>>> On this side of the pond we had problems getting hold of the US sized 4
>>>>> hole binders, and the paper punches to go with them.
>>>> Four hole??????????  Three hole binders are standard and generally
>>>> available in the U.S.  I don't believe that I have ever seen a four hole
>>>> binder or heard of one.
>>> http://www.viking-direct.co.uk/catalog/catalogSku.do?pr=Q2D&id=56030-WE
>>> I think the V4/V5 documenttaion came in them.
>> The V3, V4, and V5 documentation sets were all drilled for three ring
>> binders here in the U.S.  It's possible that four hole binders are or
>> were in use somewhere in the world.  If they were ever used here they
>> were not common!
> 
> ISTRC some documentation updates came with 5 (or maybe 7) hole
> "universal" punches. But, my wall sets are long gone and many brain
> cells have died since then so I could be remembering some other
> vendor.

Well, I think the five hole paper probably fits either the three or two 
hole binders.  It covers most of the bases.

On Nov 19, 1:10=A0pm, "Richard B. Gilbert" <rgilber...@comcast.net>
wrote:
> Doug Phillips wrote:
> > On Nov 18, 3:43 pm, "Richard B. Gilbert" <rgilber...@comcast.net>
> > wrote:
> >> Bob Eager wrote:
> >>> On Wed, 18 Nov 2009 16:06:45 -0500, Richard B. Gilbert wrote:
> >>>>> On this side of the pond we had problems getting hold of the US siz=
ed 4
> >>>>> hole binders, and the paper punches to go with them.
> >>>> Four hole?????????? =A0Three hole binders are standard and generally
> >>>> available in the U.S. =A0I don't believe that I have ever seen a fou=
r hole
> >>>> binder or heard of one.
> >>>http://www.viking-direct.co.uk/catalog/catalogSku.do?pr=3DQ2D&id=3D560=
30-WE
> >>> I think the V4/V5 documenttaion came in them.
> >> The V3, V4, and V5 documentation sets were all drilled for three ring
> >> binders here in the U.S. =A0It's possible that four hole binders are o=
r
> >> were in use somewhere in the world. =A0If they were ever used here the=
y
> >> were not common!
>
> > ISTRC some documentation updates came with 5 (or maybe 7) hole
> > "universal" punches. But, my wall sets are long gone and many brain
> > cells have died since then so I could be remembering some other
> > vendor.
>
> Well, I think the five hole paper probably fits either the three or two
> hole binders. =A0It covers most of the bases.

Way off the .pdf topic, and not even very important, but a quick
google shows that there is 5 hole punched paper that works for a 2, 3
or 4 ring binder. The holes are arranged so that 1, 2, 4 and 5 are
equally spaced, and 1, 3 and 5 are equally spaced. I looked in my
basement's why-am-I-keeping-this-sh** area (which *is* in U.S.A.) and
found some 4 ring binders, and even a 5 ring binder which takes paper
with all 5 holes equally spaced. The 7 hole paper should fit any 2, 3,
4 or 5 ring binder.

Anyway, that's way too much of my time spent on holes in paper;-)

Doug Phillips wrote:

> Anyway, that's way too much of my time spent on holes in paper;-)


But we have not yet debated whether Digital Equipment Corp. sent the
paper cut out to make the holes to recyclers or whether it just sent
that paper out to the normal garbage.

One must also cosnider that having more holes in documents would reduce
shipping costs (since the documents would be lighter) and would have
made Digital more competitive. We can therefore blame Digital's economic
failure on its failure to punch more holes into its printed
documentation :-)

In article 
<b2c58153-8a5a-4825-aa0f-f70c239d19ee@r24g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>,
 John Wallace <johnwallace4@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

> On Nov 18, 4:07�pm, Paul Sture <paul.nos...@sture.ch> wrote:
> > In article <hdqrfs$va$0...@news.t-online.com>,
> > �Michael Kraemer <M.Krae...@gsi.de> wrote:
> >
> > > Richard B. Gilbert schrieb:
> >
> > > > Frequently a PC is the best tool for the job. �You can sneer at the
> > > > "click and drool" interface but millions use it and it works for them!
> > > > Frequently the PC or paper and pencil are the only tools available.
> >
> > > > There are tasks that cannot be easily accomplished using Windows and
> > > > that's the reason I keep both VMS and Solaris systems around and 
> > > > wasting
> > > > electricity! �None of the three is the best tool for EVERY job.
> >
> > > The majority of people (and customers) don't want to have three
> > > vastly different systems. They standardize on the one they
> > > use for reading mail, and everything else has to follow.
> >
> > Unfortunately that mentality has managers suggesting Windows for
> > production control systems.
> >

> Of course one size fits all.
> 
> Just look outside the IT world. One size always fits all. You don't
> get civil engineers building different kinds of bridges depending on
> circumstances, production engineers always use the same kind of
> machine tool regardless of requirements, motor vehicle engineers
> always use the same engines regardless of application, there's only
> one kind of steel and engineers use it in all known applications, etc.
> A plumber only ever uses one kind of pipe, an electrician always uses
> the same kind of cable whether it is for general duties or whether it
> needs to be fire resistant, a carpenter's toolbox only ever has one
> tool in it.

You've just brought back a memory there. A schoolmate did his 
engineering sandwich year at a naval gearbox manufacturer (David Brown, 
as in tractors and the DB in Aston Martin DB), and commented how 
"positively ham" car gearboxes were in comparison.
 
> That's the way it works isn't it?
> 
> Or is it only "one size fits all" when the PHBs and their "Powerpoint
> culture" have been allowed to take over.

Long before I'd heard of PowerPoint there was the "customer we didn't 
want" who ordered an 11/730 with a tiny disk, 2 floppy drives (!!!) and 
VAX-BASIC - his son had a a home PC and was going to program it (we 
didn't know whether to laugh or cry about that one).

> ""PowerPoint was used to �demonstrate� engineering rather than explain
> a proper technical analysis. When engineering analysis and risk
> assessments are condensed to �t on a standard form or overhead slide,
> information is inevitably lost. ... PowerPoint can ... be dangerous,
> mesmerising, and lead to sloppy (or nil) thinking.".
> 
> Those are not my words, they are the words of the recently published
> UK Government report into the death of 14 servicemen in an RAF Nimrod
> aircraft crash in Afghanistan in 2006, which turns out to be a result
> of a whole trail of avoidable errors and unnecessary shortcuts, for
> which as yet no one has been prosecuted. In fact for a traditional UK
> Government inquiry, the report is exceedingly scathing and even names
> individuals.

There's also "PowerPoint Does Rocket Science", a case study of PP's role 
in the 2003 Columbia disaster:

http://www.edwardtufte.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=0001yB 

> But as many of us round here know from our own experience,
> inappropriate use of "Powerpoint culture" extends far, far beyond the
> military and their suppliers.
> 
> You could also argue that the big commercial players in the IT game
> have largely built up a self-preserving Microsoft-dependent
> monoculture, but that's a different subject for a different day.
> 
> Ref: 
> 
<http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/oct/29/nimrod-crash-inquiry
-raf-afghanistan>

And I had someone telling me today that I _must_ produce something in MS 
Word format. I've read enough about incompatibilities between different 
versions of Word that even getting Office for Mac might not solve that 
problem. It's vicious.

-- 
Paul Sture