Date   

Re: test

Dave Sergeant
 

Seems to work here Richard...

On 29 Mar 2016 at 17:45, Dave Sergeant wrote:

Just testing...
Dave

http://davesergeant.com


test

Dave Sergeant
 

Just testing...
Dave

http://davesergeant.com


Groups.io given up the ghost?

Richard Russell
 

Groups.io, which at one point looked to be a promising candidate as a possible replacement for this group, seems to have stopped working. I can read existing messages there, and I can apparently post new ones, but the last two posts I have attempted to make have vanished into the ether and haven't appeared either at the website or via email.

So only Wiggio and Conforums currently remain as active BB4W forums.

Richard.

NOTE: Replies on this group are disabled. If you want to comment on this post please do so at http://bbcbasic.conforums.com/


Asus Zenfone Zoom

Richard Russell
 

My exhorting of members to obtain an Android (x86) smartphone has, to say the least, met with little success. Indeed I don't know of anybody - except me - who currently has one, which is a significant dampener on my enthusiasm for continuing development of BBC BASIC for that platform (albeit that the current versionis quite functional).

http://www.rtr.myzen.co.uk/BBCBasic.apk

From feedback I have received I know that one reason has been an unwillingness to invest in 'old technology', i.e. in a phone which (whilst brand new and in the manufacturer's original packaging) isn't the latest model and doesn't run an up-to-date version of Android.

I'm pleased to be able to draw your attention to the Asus Zenfone Zoom which is a recently-released Intel smartphone running Android 5.0 (Lollipop). This phone's Unique Selling Point is its high-spec camera with a 3:1 optical zoom lens, but from the perspective of this group it means that you can have a phone which will run BBC BASIC whilst still impressing your friends!

https://www.asus.com/Phone/ZenFone-Zoom-ZX551ML/

So I would encourage anybody who hasn't yet got a smartphone (a situation I was in until recently and nothing to be ashamed about), or thinking about replacing their current model, to give serious consideration to purchasing one of these modestly-priced Intel phones.

Richard.

NOTE: Replies here are disabled, If you want to comment on this post please do so at the Conforums board: http://bbcbasic.conforums.com/


Re: Totally useless Yahoo Neo rubbish!

Richard Russell
 

---In bb4w@yahoogroups.com, <dave@davesergeant.com> wrote :
> Assuming you mean https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/lbb/info
> then that group seems to be set up as a plain text group....
> The group must be set to allow attachments, and email subscribers
> must select 'fully featured' if they want to keep HTML formatting...

For reference, I did a 'view source' on the email sent by Yahoo from that group. It includes:

Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
....
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
....
Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII
....
<!--~-|**|PrettyHtmlStartT|**|-~-->

So whatever you think it *should* be doing, as usual it has completely f****d it up.

Richard.


Change to group settings

Richard Russell
 

This group will no longer accept new posts.


Richard.


Re: Totally useless Yahoo Neo rubbish!

Richard Russell
 

---In bb4w@yahoogroups.com, <dave@davesergeant.com> wrote :
> that group seems to be set up as a plain text group with no attachments


If I can see a nicely formatted message in the Neo message editor there is absolutely no reason why it shouldn't be able to display the same formatting on the web interface - it's the same web site after all! If for some obscure reason it can't do so, at the very least it should warn me that pressing Send will cause my message to be damaged to the extent of being unreadable.


> Plain text messages and emails by definition cannot contain

> any text formatting other than CR/LF.


I would be perfectly happy for my message to be rendered in plain text. Basically that just means removing any bold formatting, which is there for cosmetic reasons only. But the layout should remain the same: where the formatted HTML version has a blank line, so should the plain text version. Where the formatted version is indented, so should the plain text version be. This is not rocket science.


> Composing messages in an HTML interface and expecting them to
> maintain the same look when transposed into plain text is never going to work.


If formatting is not allowed, it should not offer an editor which permits you to use it. If the final message is going to be rendered in plain text, pasting into the editor should paste just plain text.


You really should stop trying to defend the indefensible.


Richard.


Re: Totally useless Yahoo Neo rubbish!

Dave Sergeant
 

Assuming you mean https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/lbb/info then
that group seems to be set up as a plain text group with no attachments
allowed. Plain text messages and emails by definition cannot contain
any text formatting other than CR/LF. The group must be set to allow
attachments, and email subscribers must select 'fully featured' if they
want to keep <HTML> formatting in messages. Composing messages in an
<HTML> interface and expecting them to maintain the same look when
transposed into plain text is never going to work.

Dave


On 13 Mar 2016 at 8:19, yahoo@rtrussell.co.uk [bb4w] wrote:

I've just posted a message to the LBB Yahoo! group. It's a message
which I had carefully prepared and formatted on Conforums, and then
simply copied-and-pasted into the Neo editor. It looked lovely: all the
formatting, indentation, bolding etc. appeared in the Neo editor exactly
as it had on Conforums (after all, the same formatting options are
supposed to be available - they're all in the toolbar just above where I
am typing now).


So I pressed Send, confidently expecting that the message would at
least look the same when viewed on the web
interface, if not quite as nice in emails (although since multipart
emails are sent there's no good reason why it shouldn't be when viewed
in an HTML-enabled client).


But what did I see? All the formatting completely deleted, both on the
web page and in the email version. The layout
ruined because of line-terminations being thrown away. The whole thing
pretty much unreadable. And of course there's no way of editing it
(nothing useful like a Preview button so you see what kind of mess Neo
is going to make of it).


Anybody who seriously suggests that Yahoo! is a suitable place for a
BB4W discussion forum needs their head examined.


Richard.


http://davesergeant.com


Totally useless Yahoo Neo rubbish!

Richard Russell
 

I've just posted a message to the LBB Yahoo! group. It's a message which I had carefully prepared and formatted on Conforums, and then simply copied-and-pasted into the Neo editor. It looked lovely: all the formatting, indentation, bolding etc. appeared in the Neo editor exactly as it had on Conforums (after all, the same formatting options are supposed to be available - they're all in the toolbar just above where I am typing now).


So I pressed Send, confidently expecting that the message would at least look the same when viewed on the web interface, if not quite as nice in emails (although since multipart emails are sent there's no good reason why it shouldn't be when viewed in an HTML-enabled client).


But what did I see? All the formatting completely deleted, both on the web page and in the email version. The layout ruined because of line-terminations being thrown away. The whole thing pretty much unreadable. And of course there's no way of editing it (nothing useful like a Preview button so you see what kind of mess Neo is going to make of it).


Anybody who seriously suggests that Yahoo! is a suitable place for a BB4W discussion forum needs their head examined.


Richard.


Re: BBC BASIC for Windows version 6.02a released

J.G.Harston
 

rtrussell wrote:
I work behind a government firewall, where personal webmail is okay
but browsing web sites that are not work related is not okay
That must be exceptionally unusual.

I once worked behind a (local) government firewall which blocked the
very websites were were instructed to use to communicate with residents
through!


- You should communicate with community groups via their online presence
* But the firewall blocks the community groups' Facebook pages!
- Facebook is 'non-work' so is blocked at the firewall


I also once sat on a disciplinary panel of somebody who had been
"booked"
for browsing holiday websites on council computers. Her job? Arranging
holidays for local-authority looked-after children.


--
J.G.Harston - jgh@mdfs.net - mdfs.net/jgh


Re: BBC BASIC for Windows version 6.02a released

Richard Russell
 

---In bb4w@yahoogroups.com, <mark@markesystems.com> wrote :
> I agree completely with your assessment of this situation, with one possible
> exception that I hope you’re wrong about: the falling number of users.


You shouldn't feel too bad about it. The great majority of BB4W users were always going to be people who fondly remembered BBC BASIC from their youth in the 1980s and early 1990s. After all, more than 1.5 million BBC Micros and later Acorn machines were sold during this period, with most UK schools having them (and many teaching BBC BASIC). It's inevitable that some 30 years later this cohort is diminishing, and although there are a few people coming to BB4W afresh that isn't enough to compensate.


> Many of these are such compelling reasons that I’ve also recommended the
> product to several other folks.


I'm pleased you find it useful, and I have tried hard to keep BB4W up-to-date, but the fact remains that it is a 35-year-old language. I remember very well attending the Beeb@30 celebrations a few years ago, where I was pretty much a lone voice in suggesting that BBC BASIC had any relevance today. Even those who might perhaps be expected to share that view, such as Sophie Wilson and others who were involved in the early days, were of the opinion that it is of historical significance only.


Of course there has been something of a resurgence of interest in recent years with one of the UK examining boards - Oxford, Cambridge & RSA (OCR) - listing BBC BASIC as an 'approved' language. The number of schools adopting it has been disappointingly (but not surprisingly) small, but nevertheless welcome. I don't have any feel for how many young users are coming to BBC BASIC through that route.


I strongly suspect that BBC BASIC would be more popular if it was supported on a wider range of platforms, particularly the ubiquitous mobile devices that (nearly) everybody seems to rely on these days. It was for that reason that late last year I started work on an SDL 2.0 version of BB4W, as a route to porting it to Linux (x86), Mac OS-X and Android (x86). But whereas I had hoped this would stimulate a new enthusiasm for the language - not least in me - the (almost) universal reaction has been that I am wasting my time.


To some extent this has been because the Android version requires an 'Intel' CPU, which is relatively rare (although I have both a tablet and a smartphone which can run BBC BASIC). That is understandable to a degree, but in my opinion is unnecessarily negative (for example quite a lot of the work I have done would be directly relevant to porting the ARM version of BBC BASIC to Android and iOS, if somebody with the right skills were interested).


I could go on, but I am in danger of making comments 'closer to home' which could be construed as offensive, so I will stop before I say something I later regret.


Richard.


Re: BBC BASIC for Windows version 6.02a released

Storer, Darren
 

​The phrase, "herding cats" springs to mind :-(

I apologise if my last e-mail seemed to be overbearing, it wasn't meant to
be.

Above all, I'm very grateful for BB4W and your continued efforts to support
and port the environment to new platforms. In reality, the only thing that
I wish for is a community environment that sends alerts when there is
activity. The suggestion of BB4W to achieve the alerts seemed to be an
elegant solution...

D.







On 11 March 2016 at 17:41, yahoo@rtrussell.co.uk [bb4w] <
bb4w@yahoogroups.com> wrote:



---In bb4w@yahoogroups.com, <darren.storer@gmail.com> wrote :
Why would you forcibly excommunicate a significant audience that has
demonstrated an interest in BB4W? Why not let the Yahoo! BB4W users
chat away and post the odd important announcement if you see fit

I have explained all this before. There is currently only a small (and
falling) number of active BB4W users, and only if they all gather in the
same place is there the necessary 'critical mass' for a useful degree of
cooperative support to be provided. Typically what happens at the moment is
one of the following:


1. A question is asked on one of the groups/forums, but the 'expert' in
that particular area subscribes only to one of the other forums. Hence the
question goes unanswered, or is answered poorly or misleadingly.


2. A question is asked on one of the forums, and fortunately the 'expert'
in that field happens to read that particular forum (or he goes to the
trouble of monitoring them all). He then replies, but those users who
subscribe to the other forums see neither the question nor the answer, so
don't benefit from 'shared knowledge'.


3. I want to make an announcement, so to make sure 'everybody' sees it I
post a message to all the groups/forums. This is a pain for me (especially
as the formatting capabilities are all different) and annoys those who
subscribe to more than one forum and receive multiple copies in their
inbox. Often there are followup replies, but of course they and any
subsequent discussion appear only on one forum (despite the likelihood of
them being relevant to, or at least of interest to, everybody who saw the
original announcement).


You must surely see that this situation is untenable.


Richard.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



Re: BBC BASIC for Windows version 6.02a released

Mark Moulding
 

Richard, I agree completely with your assessment of this situation, with one possible exception that I hope you’re wrong about: the falling number of users. I’ve recently adopted BBC-Basic (Windows) for several reasons: rich language capabilities, lightweight development environment, lightweight and self-contained executables, independence from the ongoing changes of Microsoft products (that render legacy applications unusable), and the forums (that is, active support).

Many of these are such compelling reasons that I’ve also recommended the product to several other folks. I realize that I’m just one guy, and perhaps I’ve brought a couple of other on-board, but it’s still a terrific product for the right sort of application, and I’d hate to thin that it’s starting to go away...
~~
Mark Moulding


From: mailto:bb4w@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, March 11, 2016 9:41 AM
To: bb4w@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [bb4w] Re: BBC BASIC for Windows version 6.02a released


---In bb4w@yahoogroups.com, <darren.storer@gmail.com> wrote :
Why would you forcibly excommunicate a significant audience that has
demonstrated an interest in BB4W? Why not let the Yahoo! BB4W users
chat away and post the odd important announcement if you see fit

I have explained all this before. There is currently only a small (and falling) number of active BB4W users, and only if they all gather in the same place is there the necessary 'critical mass' for a useful degree of cooperative support to be provided. Typically what happens at the moment is one of the following:


1. A question is asked on one of the groups/forums, but the 'expert' in that particular area subscribes only to one of the other forums. Hence the question goes unanswered, or is answered poorly or misleadingly.


2. A question is asked on one of the forums, and fortunately the 'expert' in that field happens to read that particular forum (or he goes to the trouble of monitoring them all). He then replies, but those users who subscribe to the other forums see neither the question nor the answer, so don't benefit from 'shared knowledge'.


3. I want to make an announcement, so to make sure 'everybody' sees it I post a message to all the groups/forums. This is a pain for me (especially as the formatting capabilities are all different) and annoys those who subscribe to more than one forum and receive multiple copies in their inbox. Often there are followup replies, but of course they and any subsequent discussion appear only on one forum (despite the likelihood of them being relevant to, or at least of interest to, everybody who saw the original announcement).


You must surely see that this situation is untenable.


Richard.








[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


Re: BBC BASIC for Windows version 6.02a released

Richard Russell
 

---In bb4w@yahoogroups.com, <darren.storer@gmail.com> wrote :
> Why would you forcibly excommunicate a significant audience that has

> demonstrated an interest in BB4W? Why not let the Yahoo! BB4W users
> chat away and post the odd important announcement if you see fit


I have explained all this before. There is currently only a small (and falling) number of active BB4W users, and only if they all gather in the same place is there the necessary 'critical mass' for a useful degree of cooperative support to be provided. Typically what happens at the moment is one of the following:


1. A question is asked on one of the groups/forums, but the 'expert' in that particular area subscribes only to one of the other forums. Hence the question goes unanswered, or is answered poorly or misleadingly.


2. A question is asked on one of the forums, and fortunately the 'expert' in that field happens to read that particular forum (or he goes to the trouble of monitoring them all). He then replies, but those users who subscribe to the other forums see neither the question nor the answer, so don't benefit from 'shared knowledge'.


3. I want to make an announcement, so to make sure 'everybody' sees it I post a message to all the groups/forums. This is a pain for me (especially as the formatting capabilities are all different) and annoys those who subscribe to more than one forum and receive multiple copies in their inbox. Often there are followup replies, but of course they and any subsequent discussion appear only on one forum (despite the likelihood of them being relevant to, or at least of interest to, everybody who saw the original announcement).


You must surely see that this situation is untenable.


Richard.


Re: BBC BASIC for Windows version 6.02a released

Storer, Darren
 

Hi Richard,

for my sins I manage around half a dozen technical Yahoo! groups but I have
been largely spared the angst of the "Neo" debacle, as all my management
tasks are fulfilled via e-mail. Long ago I dedicated a Gmail account to
the task and now I have many years (and > 40 Gb) of fully searchable
archives of all the groups that I moderate and subscribe to. Gmail
automatically presents conversation threads, thereby negating the religious
topic of "top posting".

The only Yahoo! groups [that I moderate] that have withered, are the ones
have migrated to Facebook; these groups have swollen with international
participation, multimedia content and even interaction with modern "yoof".

It's very rare that I have to login to Yahoo! - it's quite a shame that you
are very terminal/connection oriented and don't feel comfortable to entrust
old fashioned (but extremely reliable) e-mail transport to do the job for
you.

Why would you forcibly excommunicate a significant audience that has
demonstrated an interest in BB4W? Why not let the Yahoo! BB4W users chat
away and post the odd important announcement if you see fit - no one is
forcing you to participate via Yahoo!

Best regards

Darren

On 11 March 2016 at 13:52, yahoo@rtrussell.co.uk [bb4w] <
bb4w@yahoogroups.com> wrote:



---In bb4w@yahoogroups.com, <darren.storer@gmail.com> wrote :
I am often "stuck" using an iPhone for Internet access

It's regrettable if the Conforums pages are not very 'mobile compatible'
but it's not (in my opinion) a valid argument for maintaining email access.
If somebody can point me to a more suitable forums host I will certainly
consider it.


I work behind a government firewall, where personal webmail is okay
but browsing web sites that are not work related is not okay

That must be exceptionally unusual. But in any case I hardly think I
should be encouraging 'cheating' by making the blocked information
available by email! :)


why not leave the Yahoo! ecosystem
to whither and concentrate your efforts on the new fangled forums?

I have explained that on multiple occasions and in detail. Please note
that this group *was* closed to new posts for an extended period, and the
world continued to turn.


Keeping this group going is out of the question, since thare is no sign
that Yahoo! plans to fix the multiple issues which make it so annoying to
use (you wouldn't believe how long it took to incorporate the 'quotes'
above; even basic editing operations like backspace and delete don't work
properly in quoted text).



Richard.








[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


Re: BBC BASIC for Windows version 6.02a released

Richard Russell
 

---In bb4w@yahoogroups.com, <darren.storer@gmail.com> wrote :
> I am often "stuck" using an iPhone for Internet access


It's regrettable if the Conforums pages are not very 'mobile compatible' but it's not (in my opinion) a valid argument for maintaining email access. If somebody can point me to a more suitable forums host I will certainly consider it.


> I work behind a government firewall, where personal webmail is okay
> but browsing web sites that are not work related is not okay


That must be exceptionally unusual. But in any case I hardly think I should be encouraging 'cheating' by making the blocked information available by email! :)


> why not leave the Yahoo! ecosystem
> to whither and concentrate your efforts on the new fangled forums?


I have explained that on multiple occasions and in detail. Please note that this group *was* closed to new posts for an extended period, and the world continued to turn.


Keeping this group going is out of the question, since thare is no sign that Yahoo! plans to fix the multiple issues which make it so annoying to use (you wouldn't believe how long it took to incorporate the 'quotes' above; even basic editing operations like backspace and delete don't work properly in quoted text).



Richard.


Re: Single BB4W Focal Point

Ian_Wade_G3NRW
 

Dave

Since I uttered the words below, I decided to set up my own conforum, to see if RSS is actually available.

It is not an option.

Thinking it over further, although I previously said I prefer a forum over a Yahoo or Google format, I accept that this particular Yahoo group [bb4w] seems to carry most of the "general" BB4W discussion traffic that everyone can see as soon as it is posted.

So how about a half-way house:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
1. Use the pink conforum primarily for detailed software discussions, queries etc. together with general announcements as a matter of record. The conforum would essentially be a repository of technical discussion, and the format is conducive to presenting code in a guaranteed copyable manner.

2. Use this Yahoo group [bb4w] for general discussion, announcements etc, including messages to draw attention to any new technical topics in the conforum.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

This is a compromise, I acknowledge, but nowhere as bad as the current mismanaged mess. Certainly better than losing many people altogether.

--
73
Ian, G3NRW

On 03/03/2016 17:31, Ian_Wade_G3NRW g3nrw-radio@ntlworld.com [bb4w] wrote:
Dave

There shouldn't be any need to lose emails. As far as I know, conforums
have an RSS feed that can feed the messages as emails to you (I tried
without success to verify this now, because the conforums site is
singularly unhelpful in not giving you *any* details of its capabilities
until you actually sign up to create a new forum yourself!).

As he is the owner, Richard should be able to confirm if the bb4w
conforum supports RSS feed. I am already signed up to yet another type
of forum (http://forum.network105.net), have selected RSS feed, and all
messages appear in my mailer (Thunderbird) as they are created. All I
had to do was redirect incoming mail to the Network 105 mail folder, so
I see the messages immediately.


Re: BBC BASIC for Windows version 6.02a released

Dave Sergeant
 

Not sure I understand your second bit Darren, but indeed why indeed to
abandon this long standing group with 569 members with a forum only set
up in the last couple of months which still has only 46 members and 100
posts?

Dave

On 11 Mar 2016 at 8:03, 'Storer, Darren' darren.storer@gmail.com wrote:

To use one of your own phrases, why would you wilfully absent one of the
largest (and oldest) user groups; why not leave the Yahoo! ecosystem to
whither and concentrate your efforts on the new fangled forums?

http://davesergeant.com


Re: BBC BASIC for Windows version 6.02a released

Storer, Darren
 

Hi Richard,

please find below a couple of use cases for your enlightenment:

- I am often "stuck" using an iPhone for Internet access - a larger font
in the e-mail client helps with my eyesight problems but web browsing is
increasingly tricky
- I work behind a government firewall, where personal webmail is okay but
browsing web sites that are not work related is not okay - hence the use of
the small portable web client for extended periods.

To use one of your own phrases, why would you wilfully absent one of the
largest (and oldest) user groups; why not leave the Yahoo! ecosystem to
whither and concentrate your efforts on the new fangled forums?

Thanks again

Darren



On 11 March 2016 at 03:58, yahoo@rtrussell.co.uk [bb4w] <
bb4w@yahoogroups.com> wrote:



---In bb4w@yahoogroups.com, <darren.storer@gmail.com> wrote :
For those of you who are sat behind a firewall at work but still have
e-mail access (or those of you using a portable device with poor
web rendering) ....

It has been proposed that this group and the other 'email based' forums be
closed to new messages, so if that plan goes ahead you would not be able to
cross-post in this way. However it seems to me highly unlikely that either
of the scenarios you mention - being unable to access the web or able to do
so only from a mobile device - would occur in practice.


If anybody is genuinely in either of those situations and would therefore
be adversely affected by focussing support at Conforums please make
yourself known.


Richard.



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


Re: BBC BASIC for Windows version 6.02a released

Richard Russell
 

---In bb4w@yahoogroups.com, <darren.storer@gmail.com> wrote :
> For those of you who are sat behind a firewall at work but still have
> e-mail access (or those of you using a portable device with poor
> web rendering) ....


It has been proposed that this group and the other 'email based' forums be closed to new messages, so if that plan goes ahead you would not be able to cross-post in this way. However it seems to me highly unlikely that either of the scenarios you mention - being unable to access the web or able to do so only from a mobile device - would occur in practice.


If anybody is genuinely in either of those situations and would therefore be adversely affected by focussing support at Conforums please make yourself known.


Richard.

3101 - 3120 of 23891