Newsgroup readers

[Ken Blake]

What you wrote isn't wrong, it's just too generalised.

I went down the list of applications pinned to my task bar, typing into
each in turn while toggling the Insert key, and seeing whether they
overwrote or not.

Turnpike: Yes.
Windows Explorer: No.
Firefox: No.
Google Chrome: No.
Quicken: No.
Ultra Edit: No.
Dreamweaver: No.
VNC: No.
Fireworks: No.
Safari: No.
Microsoft Word: No.
Microsoft Excel: Yes.
Microsoft Access: Yes.

The "No"s not only exist, but are a clear majority, in the programs I
use most anyway.

(It's possible that some time long ago I configured one or two of those
programs to ignore the Insert key, but I don't think that would change
the overall result.)

Thanks. Apparently I *am* wrong, then. Because I have my insert key
turned off, it isn't easy to do what you did and check for myself. I'd
have to turn it back on, then off again after checking.

 

[Mike Barnes]

Thanks. Apparently I *am* wrong, then. Because I have my insert key
turned off, it isn't easy to do what you did and check for myself. I'd
have to turn it back on, then off again after checking.

That's what I had to do. You can probably imagine how many times I
cursed when I realised I'd been typing my previous message in overtype
mode.

 

[Ken Blake]

Ken Blake <[email protected]>:

That's what I had to do. You can probably imagine how many times I
cursed when I realised I'd been typing my previous message in overtype
mode.

Sorry, I didn't make myself clear. When I said "I have my insert key
turned off," I meant that I had the function of that key turned off,
with Sharpkeys, not that I used it to change the mode. I would have to
used Sharpkeys to turn it back on so I could change the mode, then use
Sharpkeys again to turn it back off, because I don't want to keep it
on.

 

[Mike Barnes]

Sorry, I didn't make myself clear. When I said "I have my insert key
turned off," I meant that I had the function of that key turned off,
with Sharpkeys, not that I used it to change the mode.

No misunderstanding, that's what I thought you meant. I use a program
called sMaRTcaPs to disable my Insert key, but not while I was testing
programs (obviously) or typing the message (which I alternated with
testing).

 

[Gene Wirchenko]

On Sat, 13 Oct 2012 19:45:38 +0100, Mike Barnes

[snip]

Fixed-width data? I thought that died out some time around 1990.

You are sadly misinformed. There are plenty of areas where data
is restricted to a certain number of characters. When two or more of
these are concatenated, one has to be careful. This is something that
a programmer is more likely to run into than a run-of-the-garden user
is, but it still happens.

[snip]

Sincerely,

Gene Wirchenko

 

[Mike Barnes]

On Sat, 13 Oct 2012 19:45:38 +0100, Mike Barnes

[snip]

Fixed-width data? I thought that died out some time around 1990.

You are sadly misinformed. There are plenty of areas where data
is restricted to a certain number of characters. When two or more of
these are concatenated, one has to be careful. This is something that
a programmer is more likely to run into than a run-of-the-garden user
is, but it still happens.

No, I'm not misinformed, it was light-hearted jest, an exaggeration for
comic effect. You've disguised that by removing the context.

 

[Ian Jackson]

On Sat, 13 Oct 2012 19:45:38 +0100, Mike Barnes

[snip]

Fixed-width data? I thought that died out some time around 1990.

You are sadly misinformed. There are plenty of areas where data
is restricted to a certain number of characters. When two or more of
these are concatenated, one has to be careful. This is something that
a programmer is more likely to run into than a run-of-the-garden user
is, but it still happens.

No, I'm not misinformed, it was light-hearted jest, an exaggeration for
comic effect. You've disguised that by removing the context.

What I'm not quite clear about is whether you guys think the overwrite
mode has any real virtue. Every so often - and apparently spontaneously
- my keyboard goes into overwrite, and it's most annoying to find that,
too late, I've accidentally overwritten several words. I can't say I've
ever desperately needed it, and could live without it.
*At least in Turnpike and Word - haven't tried anything else.

 

[Jenny Telia]

I refuse to believe that there's anybody in this group who can't afford
$29, or whatever Agent is today.

On that basis, perhaps this newsgroup is better labelled
'alt.comp.I-refuse-to-believe-that-there's-anybody-in-this
group-who-can't-afford-$29'

 

[Mike Barnes]

On Sat, 13 Oct 2012 19:45:38 +0100, Mike Barnes

[snip]

Fixed-width data? I thought that died out some time around 1990.

You are sadly misinformed. There are plenty of areas where data
is restricted to a certain number of characters. When two or more of
these are concatenated, one has to be careful. This is something that
a programmer is more likely to run into than a run-of-the-garden user
is, but it still happens.

No, I'm not misinformed, it was light-hearted jest, an exaggeration for
comic effect. You've disguised that by removing the context.

What I'm not quite clear about is whether you guys think the overwrite
mode has any real virtue.

Speaking for myself it's obviously useful for some people - principally
techies - but not for me even though I'm a techie. It was more useful in
the days before applications allowed you to select a series of
characters for overtyping. Even then it was a real nuisance for people
who don't look at the screen when typing and hit the Insert key without
realising.

Every so often - and apparently spontaneously - my keyboard goes into
overwrite, and it's most annoying to find that, too late, I've
accidentally overwritten several words. I can't say I've ever
desperately needed it, and could live without it.

You could try sMaRTcaPs:

http://download.cnet.com/sMaRTcaPs/3000-2072_4-10043115.html

That program can disable the Insert key. Also it can make a sound when
the insert state is changed, which might work even for a phantom key
press.

 

[Ken Blake]

What I'm not quite clear about is whether you guys think the overwrite
mode has any real virtue.

I certainly don't--at least not for me.

Every so often - and apparently spontaneously
- my keyboard goes into overwrite, and it's most annoying to find that,
too late, I've accidentally overwritten several words.

It's not spontaneous. Undoubtedly, you accidentally hit the Insert
key.

As I said before in this thread, I sometimes accidentally hit the
Insert key, so I use the freeware program SharpKeys to disable it. So
I am *never* in overwrite mode.

 

[Robin Bignall]

On that basis, perhaps this newsgroup is better labelled
'alt.comp.I-refuse-to-believe-that-there's-anybody-in-this
group-who-can't-afford-$29'

It's just that I'm curious Jenny. There're all these people spending
lotsa dough on hardware, but expect software and services to be free. I
tend to think that you get what you pay for.

 

[Gene Wirchenko]

On Sat, 13 Oct 2012 19:45:38 +0100, Mike Barnes

[snip]

Fixed-width data? I thought that died out some time around 1990.

You are sadly misinformed. There are plenty of areas where data
is restricted to a certain number of characters. When two or more of
these are concatenated, one has to be careful. This is something that
a programmer is more likely to run into than a run-of-the-garden user
is, but it still happens.

No, I'm not misinformed, it was light-hearted jest, an exaggeration for
comic effect. You've disguised that by removing the context.

No. I left in the context.

Sincerely,

Gene Wirchenko

 

[Mike Barnes]

On Sat, 13 Oct 2012 19:45:38 +0100, Mike Barnes

[snip]

Fixed-width data? I thought that died out some time around 1990.

You are sadly misinformed. There are plenty of areas where data
is restricted to a certain number of characters. When two or more of
these are concatenated, one has to be careful. This is something that
a programmer is more likely to run into than a run-of-the-garden user
is, but it still happens.

No, I'm not misinformed, it was light-hearted jest, an exaggeration for
comic effect. You've disguised that by removing the context.

No. I left in the context.

Sincerely,

Gene Wirchenko

You say "Sincerely" but I don't get it. Was "[snip]" the context you
left in?

As oversnipping goes it scores probably less than 1/10 so I'm not
complaining but I am curious.

 

[Gene E. Bloch]

On Sat, 13 Oct 2012 19:45:38 +0100, Mike Barnes

[snip]

Fixed-width data? I thought that died out some time around 1990.

You are sadly misinformed. There are plenty of areas where data
is restricted to a certain number of characters. When two or more of
these are concatenated, one has to be careful. This is something that
a programmer is more likely to run into than a run-of-the-garden user
is, but it still happens.

No, I'm not misinformed, it was light-hearted jest, an exaggeration for
comic effect. You've disguised that by removing the context.

What I'm not quite clear about is whether you guys think the overwrite
mode has any real virtue. Every so often - and apparently spontaneously
- my keyboard goes into overwrite, and it's most annoying to find that,
too late, I've accidentally overwritten several words. I can't say I've
ever desperately needed it, and could live without it.
*At least in Turnpike and Word - haven't tried anything else.

Overwrite is very useful for me whenever I accidentally type a swear
word. Since, as you all know, those are four-letter words, overwrite is
the obvious tool to fix it.

The above is pure whimsy, so don't get upset (unless you want to, of
course).

 

[Ken Blake]

Overwrite is very useful for me whenever I accidentally type a swear
word. Since, as you all know, those are four-letter words, overwrite is
the obvious tool to fix it.

The above is pure whimsy, so don't get upset (unless you want to, of
course).

Even though you meant it jokingly, I'll reply.

To me it's not the obvious way. I would simply double-click the word
(in most applications) to select it, then type what I wanted to
replace it with (which might *not* be a four letter word). Even if
what I wanted to replace it with was a four-letter word, to me that
would be much easier than positioning the cursor to overtype it,
pressing Insert to turn Overtype on, typing the replacement, then
pressing Insert again. to turn it back off,

 

[Gene Wirchenko]

On Mon, 15 Oct 2012 18:16:14 +0100, Mike Barnes

[snip]

You say "Sincerely" but I don't get it. Was "[snip]" the context you
left in?

Why bless your heart!

As oversnipping goes it scores probably less than 1/10 so I'm not
complaining but I am curious.

I figure that if you want/need more than the *immediate* context,
you can go back-thread and read it.

Sincerely,

Gene Wirchenko

 

[Gene E. Bloch]

Even though you meant it jokingly, I'll reply.

To me it's not the obvious way. I would simply double-click the word
(in most applications) to select it, then type what I wanted to
replace it with (which might *not* be a four letter word). Even if
what I wanted to replace it with was a four-letter word, to me that
would be much easier than positioning the cursor to overtype it,
pressing Insert to turn Overtype on, typing the replacement, then
pressing Insert again. to turn it back off,

Of course.

In these modern times, I hardly ever use overwrite. In fact, if you
count only the times I do it on purpose, it's virtually never...

 

[Gene Wirchenko]

On Mon, 15 Oct 2012 18:16:14 +0100, Mike Barnes

[snip]

You say "Sincerely" but I don't get it. Was "[snip]" the context you
left in?

Why bless your heart!

As oversnipping goes it scores probably less than 1/10 so I'm not
complaining but I am curious.

I figure that if you want/need more than the *immediate* context,
you can go back-thread and read it.

It's not a question of what the reader wants, it's a question of what
your posting conveys. What you "figure" above could be used in an
attempt to excuse any oversnipping, even the most malicious.

By the *immediate* context you must mean the words of mine that you were
responding to, and their attribution. You snipped everything else.

Yes, of course. Why leave in something if it is not germane to
the reply?

When I remarked on your removal of context, you flat-out denied it. The
only way that stacks up is you pretending that I meant the context of
your words (which you kept), whereas I obviously meant the context of
*my* words (which you snipped). That doesn't come across to me as at all
"Sincerely".

I left what I considered to be the relevant context. You appear
to want to be upset about this. Fine, go ahead.

Sincerely,

Gene Wirchenko

 

[Mike Barnes]

On Mon, 15 Oct 2012 18:16:14 +0100, Mike Barnes

[snip]

You say "Sincerely" but I don't get it. Was "[snip]" the context you
left in?

Why bless your heart!

As oversnipping goes it scores probably less than 1/10 so I'm not
complaining but I am curious.

I figure that if you want/need more than the *immediate* context,
you can go back-thread and read it.

It's not a question of what the reader wants, it's a question of what
your posting conveys. What you "figure" above could be used in an
attempt to excuse any oversnipping, even the most malicious.

By the *immediate* context you must mean the words of mine that you were
responding to, and their attribution. You snipped everything else.

Yes, of course. Why leave in something if it is not germane to
the reply?

When I remarked on your removal of context, you flat-out denied it. The
only way that stacks up is you pretending that I meant the context of
your words (which you kept), whereas I obviously meant the context of
*my* words (which you snipped). That doesn't come across to me as at all
"Sincerely".

I left what I considered to be the relevant context. You appear
to want to be upset about this.

You've got that completely wrong. I'm not upset by anything, especially
not you leaving stuff out. You've clearly forgotten that I wrote "As
oversnipping goes it scores probably less than 1/10 so I'm not
complaining". Does that sound like I'm upset about it?

What actually got my attention was you denying that you'd done it. "I
left in the context", you wrote. As often happens, the drawn-out
attempts at a cover-up turn out to be more significant than the original
misdeed, which I repeat was pretty trivial.

 

[Gene Wirchenko]

On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 20:25:36 +0100, Mike Barnes

[snip]

What actually got my attention was you denying that you'd done it. "I
left in the context", you wrote. As often happens, the drawn-out
attempts at a cover-up turn out to be more significant than the original
misdeed, which I repeat was pretty trivial.

Ha ha! Coverup? When anyone can read the thread history if he
chooses?

Sincerely,

Gene Wirchenko