INFO-VAX Fri, 23 Mar 2007 Volume 2007 : Issue 163 Contents: Re: 216 Million Americans Are Scientifically Illiterate (Part II) Re: 216 Million Americans Are Scientifically Illiterate (Part II) Re: 216 Million Americans Are Scientifically Illiterate (Part II) Re: 216 Million Americans Are Scientifically Illiterate (Part II) Re: 216 Million Americans Are Scientifically Illiterate (Part II) Re: AMD's well may be running dry RE: Ancinet History Re: decwindows with multiple monitors Re: end of DLT? Belluzzo strikes again Re: ENOUGH! Re: ENOUGH! Re: ENOUGH! Re: ENOUGH! Re: ENOUGH! Re: ENOUGH! Re: FTPS Server for OpenVMS (Also posted to the ITRC) Re: Gore brainwashing world to ban the light bulb! Re: Gore brainwashing world to ban the light bulb! Re: Gore brainwashing world to ban the light bulb! Re: Gore brainwashing world to ban the light bulb! Re: Gore brainwashing world to ban the light bulb! Re: Gore brainwashing world to ban the light bulb! Re: Gore brainwashing world to ban the light bulb! Re: Migrate Hardware Strategy Re: Not on latest Roadmap: OpenVMS VAX Version 8.x "under investigation" Re: Not on latest Roadmap: OpenVMS VAX Version 8.x "under investigation" Re: Not on latest Roadmap: OpenVMS VAX Version 8.x "under investigation" Re: Not on latest Roadmap: OpenVMS VAX Version 8.x "under investigation" Re: OT: 216 Billion Americans Squirrels Are Scientifically Illiterate (Part 36) OT: 216 Billion Americans Squirrels Are Scientifically Illiterate (Part 36) (P Re: USB Support on Alpha Re: VAX is ENOUGH! [OT] Re: Gore brainwashing world to ban the light bulb! Re: [OT] Re: Gore brainwashing world to ban the light bulb! ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2007 17:06:01 -0400 From: JF Mezei Subject: Re: 216 Million Americans Are Scientifically Illiterate (Part II) Message-ID: <21237$4602efc2$cef8887a$23735@TEKSAVVY.COM> Andrew wrote: > Bob, Creationism and Intelligent Design are not science subjects. At > least not in the real world outside the US. Consider the recent announcement of the creation of a genetically modified mosquito that is resistant to malararia and thus won't spread it. They even added phosphor to its eyes so they could spot the mosquito in a "heard" of mosquitoes. Thousands of years from now, assuming that mosquito becomes prevalent, people will talk of a missing link, not quite understanding what would have caused that genetic mutation in the mosquito. By starting to play with genes, humankind is becoming a creator, and may one day be considered a god to another planet. The theory of evolution is not contradicted by this. Both evolution and "intelligent design" can co-exist. Our current DNA could be the 100% result of lucky mutations. Or there could have been some tweaking done ages ago, just like we are tweaking plants and insects today. The human body (or mammals) is an incredible machine. When you look at everything that happens during pregnancy, childbirth and afterwards, there are a gazillion things that go on, with hormones and enzymes kicking at the right time to result in the right stuff happening. or even when you look at how skin reacts to a cut: enzymes are generated that eat bacteria and create a by-product. Once all bacteria are eaten, that by-product ceases to be produced and the enzymes now generate fibroblasts that start to bridge the wound, and once that is done, new enzymes get produced that start to create collagen which forms the stronger scar, and then when that is done, the collagen starts to be destroyed to some extent as well as the fibroblasts pulling the skin edges closer to each other to close the gap/narrow the scar. (or something to that effect). It is sometimes hard to accept that we are the evolutionary equivalemt of putting a million monkeys in front of a typerwriter and expecting at least one to write a work of Shakespeare. And remember that for a mutation to take, it not only has to improve the odds of reproduction (aka: improve survival rate to reproductive age) but it must also be a dominant gene because nobody else has that gene and when the animal mates with a female, that new gene has to be transfered to the offspring. And in reality, that male will have to mate with as many females as possible to spread that improved gene sufficiently to matter. In fact, the whole story of Adam and Eve may have happened a million times. If each of our gene is the result of a random mutation on an animal, that animal then becomes our great-great-great-great grand-father. The species becomes repopulated by descendants of that animal. And this gets repeated for every mutation that has eventually lead to human beings (or racoons for that matter). ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2007 02:07:22 +0100 From: "Dr. Dweeb" Subject: Re: 216 Million Americans Are Scientifically Illiterate (Part II) Message-ID: <46032847$0$7606$157c6196@dreader2.cybercity.dk> Andrew wrote: > On 22 Mar, 16:39, "Dr. Dweeb" wrote: >> Andrew wrote: >>> On 21 Mar, 11:59, b...@instantwhip.com wrote: >>>> On Mar 21, 7:41 am, "n.ri...@sympatico.ca" >>>> wrote: >> >>>>> 216 Million Americans Are Scientifically Illiterate (Part II) >> >>>>> And then of course, religion provides definite, and comforting >>>>> answers: "don't worry, God will take care of you". Science on the >>>>> opposite - it leaves you hanging, and it tells you how >>>>> insignificant and pathetic you are. It doesn't take a genius to >>>>> figure out which religion people are going to choose. People are >>>>> babies. They long for warmth and comfort, even at the expense of >>>>> rational thinking. >> >>>> science is telling you more and more every day that God >>>> is real ... creation started it all ... we all came from the >>>> same mother and father ... that everything is unique and >>>> there is an order to the whole universe ... >> >>>> We are still waiting for science to explain the resurrection >>>> of Jesus Christ, and the miracles he did, raising men from >>>> the dead, curing blindness, leprosy, crippleds, blood diseases, >>>> all witnessed by thousands of individuals who when given >>>> a simple choice to renounce everything, they allowed >>>> themselves to be mauled by lions or worse ... >> >>>> science cannot even explain the shroud of turin yet >>>> and how the reverse negative like image of a man >>>> believed to be Christ got on that cloth ... >> >>> The US recently acquired its 300 millionth citizen (an event that >>> produced profound depression in some environmental circles given the >>> average US citizens environmental footprint). Your post shows that >>> you can definitely strike 1 from the the count of Scientifically >>> literate citizens. >> >>> Regards >>> Andrew Harrison >> >> The footprint may be big in total, but relative to the economic >> output per capita, it is not the largest. The figures were quoted >> some other thread. >> > > I am sure that this will be reassuring to the citizens of the Maldives > and Bangladesh as their countries sink beneath the waves. > > I hate to say it Dr Dweeb (is that a real doctorate or an honorary one > BTW) but your CO2/economic output/capita measure sounds bogus which is > becoming rather a familiar story. > Damn, it is so bogus that it's at Wiki. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_ratio_of_GDP_to_carbon_dioxide_emissions > Regards > Andrew Harrison ------------------------------ Date: 22 Mar 2007 18:59:45 -0700 From: "n.rieck@sympatico.ca" Subject: Re: 216 Million Americans Are Scientifically Illiterate (Part II) Message-ID: <1174615185.731439.234440@y80g2000hsf.googlegroups.com> wrote in message news: 1174564286.773120.26280@o5g2000hsb.googlegroups.com... > On Mar 21, 7:41 am, "n.ri...@sympatico.ca" > wrote: > Bob, you are scientifically retarded and I would have a better chance teaching music theory to a deaf person. But know this: many scientists believe in a god; it is only religious zealots like yourself that see science as a threat. What's your problem? Not taken part in any inquisitions lately? ### In the past we've heard lots of pro-god philosophy from scientists like Kepler through to Einstein. But check out this quote from the first paragraph of The Origin of Species (1859) by Charles Darwin: There is grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers, having been originally breathed by the Creator into a few forms or into one; and that, whilst this planet has gone cycling on according to the fixed law of gravity, from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been, and are being evolved. There is grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers, having been originally breathed by the Creator into a few forms or into one; and that, whilst this planet has gone cycling on according to the fixed law of gravity, from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been, and are being evolved. (that's right, Darwin used the word "Creator") > > that is right ... your liberal educational system is putting out > idiots by the droves ... > > instead of learning math and science, public school kids are > learning to put condoms on bananas and getting indoctrinated > by the gay lobby ... > > that is why anyone who CARES about his children will send > them to a private school and not a public one ... This sounds like the Taliban to me. (Let's not teach them anything except some one-sided crap from the old testament. Then when we want to march them off to the next crusade, we'll have a willing population.) Do you even know why we had a protestant reformation of Christianity? > > Catholic or Christian schools are the best, but even our liberal > politicians send their kids to private school, because while they > are enacting policies to dum your kids down, they are educating > their kids to think for you ... > If this were true, Catholic priests wouldn't be getting defrocked (pun intended) in droves. And what about that religious idiot Ted Haggard? I guess he wasn't able to practice what he preached, eh? And lets not forget Jim + Tammy Baker, Jimmy Swaggert and all the rest. I see us as using our god-given intelligence to collectively move from the darkness to the light while you see us as lost and waiting for a coming miracle. Idiots like you with a literal interpretation of the bible see man created perfectly and then falling from grace in Eden. The rest of us believe that the creation process is proceeding forward. (only debating with you makes me think twice about that) Neil Rieck Kitchener/Waterloo/Cambridge, Ontario, Canada. http://www3.sympatico.ca/n.rieck/ ------------------------------ Date: 23 Mar 2007 02:08:39 GMT From: bill@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) Subject: Re: 216 Million Americans Are Scientifically Illiterate (Part II) Message-ID: <56gr56F29do4vU1@mid.individual.net> In article <46031e16$0$7612$157c6196@dreader2.cybercity.dk>, "Dr. Dweeb" writes: > > Bangladesh is a delta flood plain. A particularly bad place to place a > country. > > The volume of land mass that has "sunk beneath the waves" in history is > enormous (as is the reverse). Global climate cycles through the eons have > seen to this and will continue to do so for the eons to follow - no news > there. Yeah. Anybody remember the end of the story "Waterworld". :-) bill -- Bill Gunshannon | de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. Three wolves bill@cs.scranton.edu | and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. University of Scranton | Scranton, Pennsylvania | #include ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2007 01:09:54 -0400 From: Bill Todd Subject: Re: 216 Million Americans Are Scientifically Illiterate (Part II) Message-ID: <256dnb5QWL6__J7bnZ2dnUVZ_uKknZ2d@metrocastcablevision.com> Dr. Dweeb wrote: > Andrew wrote: >> On 21 Mar, 11:59, b...@instantwhip.com wrote: >>> On Mar 21, 7:41 am, "n.ri...@sympatico.ca" >>> wrote: >>> >>>> 216 Million Americans Are Scientifically Illiterate (Part II) >>>> And then of course, religion provides definite, and comforting >>>> answers: "don't worry, God will take care of you". Science on the >>>> opposite - it leaves you hanging, and it tells you how insignificant >>>> and pathetic you are. It doesn't take a genius to figure out which >>>> religion people are going to choose. People are babies. They long >>>> for warmth and comfort, even at the expense of rational thinking. >>> science is telling you more and more every day that God >>> is real ... creation started it all ... we all came from the >>> same mother and father ... that everything is unique and >>> there is an order to the whole universe ... >>> >>> We are still waiting for science to explain the resurrection >>> of Jesus Christ, and the miracles he did, raising men from >>> the dead, curing blindness, leprosy, crippleds, blood diseases, >>> all witnessed by thousands of individuals who when given >>> a simple choice to renounce everything, they allowed >>> themselves to be mauled by lions or worse ... >>> >>> science cannot even explain the shroud of turin yet >>> and how the reverse negative like image of a man >>> believed to be Christ got on that cloth ... >> The US recently acquired its 300 millionth citizen (an event that >> produced profound depression in some environmental circles given the >> average US citizens environmental footprint). Your post shows that you >> can definitely strike 1 from the the count of Scientifically literate >> citizens. >> >> Regards >> Andrew Harrison > > The footprint may be big in total, but relative to the economic output per > capita, it is not the largest. That's about as stupid as excusing the excessive consumption of the far-higher-than-necessary percentage of SUVs on the road with the argument that they're more efficient per pound of weight than vehicles that get 2x - 3x better gas mileage. Pretty much what I'd expect from your level of intelligence, though. - bill ------------------------------ Date: 22 Mar 2007 10:58:44 -0700 From: "Andrew" Subject: Re: AMD's well may be running dry Message-ID: <1174586324.388257.192650@n59g2000hsh.googlegroups.com> On 22 Mar, 17:49, Maverick wrote: > Andrew wrote: > > On 21 Mar, 18:08, Maverick wrote: > > >>Andrew wrote: > > >>>On 20 Mar, 16:11, Maverick wrote: > > >>>>Andrew wrote: > > >>Of course how much was never ascertained. A good scientist will say "we > >>just don't know yet and more research is needed". > > > LOL, given that Professor Wunsch's views were completely distorted it > > is hardly likely that the program would have included any statement > > from him on how much impact would be made by man made CO2. > > Actually one can link several statements together from the film. A > point of natural CO2 generation is in the trillions of tons vs the > billions of tons that are manmade --> 0.043% total of the atmosphere. > Sometimes professors have no real-time experiences and some do. I'd > much rather get my education from an experienced veteran. You seem to have missed the point. Wunsch's beef with the film is that he thinks that mankind's emissions of CO2 are influencing Global Warming. However the film by judicious use of his quotes manages to make him seem to be supporting their argument. In itself that should tell you how little support there is for their line of argument. Why distort the views of a scientist with inevitable consequences if you you had another 100 equally reputable candidates queuing up to support you??? Regards Andrew Harrison ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2007 15:10:40 -0400 From: "Main, Kerry" Subject: RE: Ancinet History Message-ID: > -----Original Message----- > From: Dave Gullen [mailto:dave.gullen@gap.co.uk]=20 > Sent: March 22, 2007 11:52 AM > To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com > Subject: Ancinet History >=20 > Does anyone have an electronic copy of the HSD10 Array Controller > User's Guide (EK-HSD10-UG)? I had a look in deathrow, but nothing > there. > Thanks in advance, >=20 > Dave Gullen >=20 Dave, Drop me a line offline and I will see what I can do .. :-) Kerry Main Senior Consultant HP Services Canada Voice: 613-592-4660 Fax: 613-591-4477 kerryDOTmainAThpDOTcom (remove the DOT's and AT)=20 OpenVMS - the secure, multi-site OS that just works. =20 ------------------------------ Date: 22 Mar 2007 12:58:25 -0700 From: amelia_airhead@yahoo.com Subject: Re: decwindows with multiple monitors Message-ID: <1174593504.952816.197080@n59g2000hsh.googlegroups.com> ps - Without this, with tightly limited remote logins, launching a tool from DECTerm monopolizes my DECTerm and I'm operationally handicapped. :( I'm trying to find a way around that limitation. On Mar 22, 3:14 pm, amelia_airh...@yahoo.com wrote: > Hello, > > I'm working on OpenVMS and using DECWindows so I can use DECSet. > This works great for working on my own machine, Session Manager takes > control of all 3 of my monitors by default. > When I have to work on another cluster via set host I can't kick > off > another Session Manager on the remote host as the first login gave > control > over all 3 monitors to the Session Manager on my own machine. > I tried logging in with CDE on my own machine. This took only one > of > the 3 monitors. I logged into the remote system and launched the > Session Manager with "run sys$system:decw$session". This took the > other two monitors and the DECSet run remotely seemed to work fine. > The problem came when I logged off. It seemed to trash my local > window manager and though it did successfully log off, it never came > back to the login screen. > Would anyone know of a way I (user with user privileges) or my > system admin could set to accomplish control over which window > managers have control over which monitors? > > Thanks, > Amelia ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2007 20:07:38 -0500 From: David J Dachtera Subject: Re: end of DLT? Belluzzo strikes again Message-ID: <4603285A.884A84B@spam.comcast.net> Malcolm Dunnett wrote: > > "JF Mezei" wrote in message > news:80e63$4601a3dc$cef8887a$15875@TEKSAVVY.COM... > > At the decus presentation in toronto last month, it was said by HP that > > DLT's next generation would not support previous gererations and that > > people should be aiming for LTO. > > > > Does VMS support LTO tape drives. I seem to recall that it doesn't/didn't > (or am I just misremembering?) LTO-1 was not ANSI-compliant (blocksizes always had to be an even number of bytes) - it did not support VMS and some other systems. Windows support sucked. LTO-2 and later work with VMS, etc. > A bit of a moot point for me, DLT80 is "state of the art" on my VMS > systems :-) DLT80? Vas ist das? -- David J Dachtera dba DJE Systems http://www.djesys.com/ Unofficial OpenVMS Marketing Home Page http://www.djesys.com/vms/market/ Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/ Unofficial OpenVMS-IA32 Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/ia32/ Unofficial OpenVMS Hobbyist Support Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/support/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2007 17:11:26 -0500 From: "Island Computers, D B Turner" Subject: Re: ENOUGH! Message-ID: <1305s6om5hk2oaa@news.supernews.com> Is that really a way to talk to a fellow VMS hobbyist? People - and you know who you are - you need to calm down and exercise a little decorum ! David -- Island Computers US Corp 2700 Gregory St Savannah GA 31404 Tel: 912 447 6622 x201 Mail: dturner-atnospam-islandco-com (You know what to do with the dashes) "Doc" wrote in message news:Xns98FBE0667E69Edocopenvmsrockscom@195.238.0.230... > bob@instantwhip.com wrote in > news:1174596295.832078.316220@n59g2000hsh.googlegroups.com: > > > > > Al Gore started all this by scaring every illeterate person out > > there into buying one of his carbon eliminators ... > > It's time someone did a Carl on you. > > Shut up Boob, you're an ignorant cretin who would be fired if I passed half > of your postings on to your company's HR department. Or did you forget > that you're posting from a corporate email address? As far as your company > is concerned your looney-tunes postings about the end times are posted > under their corporate auspices. Shareholders will simply find that > unacceptable. If you're lucky you'd be banned from Usenet, more likely > you'd be shown the door. > > > Doc. ------------------------------ Date: 22 Mar 2007 21:03:32 GMT From: Doc Subject: Re: ENOUGH! Message-ID: bob@instantwhip.com wrote in news:1174596295.832078.316220@n59g2000hsh.googlegroups.com: > Al Gore started all this by scaring every illeterate person out > there into buying one of his carbon eliminators ... It's time someone did a Carl on you. Shut up Boob, you're an ignorant cretin who would be fired if I passed half of your postings on to your company's HR department. Or did you forget that you're posting from a corporate email address? As far as your company is concerned your looney-tunes postings about the end times are posted under their corporate auspices. Shareholders will simply find that unacceptable. If you're lucky you'd be banned from Usenet, more likely you'd be shown the door. Doc. ------------------------------ Date: 22 Mar 2007 21:19:15 GMT From: Doc Subject: Re: ENOUGH! Message-ID: "Island Computers, D B Turner" wrote in news:1305s6om5hk2oaa@news.supernews.com: > Is that really a way to talk to a fellow VMS hobbyist? > People - and you know who you are - you need to calm down and exercise a > little decorum ! Why are you defending Boob? He's not a hobbyist, he's an employee of a corporate customer and he is doing a *dreadful* job of representing his employer. Personally I don't care what your religious beliefs are - provided you keep them to yourself, they don't belong on this newsgroup. If you choose to bring them up then I have no sympathy for the responses you get. That should be obvious from the way I responded to Boob and his born-again nonsense about end times. Religion is private, and should remain so. Doc. ------------------------------ Date: 22 Mar 2007 15:50:09 -0700 From: bob@instantwhip.com Subject: Re: ENOUGH! Message-ID: <1174603809.290754.151200@e1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com> On Mar 22, 5:03 pm, Doc wrote: > b...@instantwhip.com wrote innews:1174596295.832078.316220@n59g2000hsh.googlegroups.com: > > > > > Al Gore started all this by scaring every illeterate person out > > there into buying one of his carbon eliminators ... > > It's time someone did a Carl on you. > > Shut up Boob, you're an ignorant cretin who would be fired if I passed half > of your postings on to your company's HR department. Or did you forget > that you're posting from a corporate email address? As far as your company > is concerned your looney-tunes postings about the end times are posted > under their corporate auspices. Shareholders will simply find that > unacceptable. If you're lucky you'd be banned from Usenet, more likely > you'd be shown the door. > > Doc. what I post on my free time is my business ... as for my boss, he believes the same and goes to church regularly ... so now you want to try and shut me up by threats? you are like all liberals ... can't stand the truth or an opinion different from your own so you resort to threats ... you are a disgrace to your employer, this board, and even more importantly, your Creator ... ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2007 20:27:00 -0500 From: David J Dachtera Subject: Re: ENOUGH! Message-ID: <46032CE4.D7C48A9D@spam.comcast.net> bob@instantwhip.com wrote: > > On Mar 22, 5:03 pm, Doc wrote: > > b...@instantwhip.com wrote innews:1174596295.832078.316220@n59g2000hsh.googlegroups.com: > > > > > > > > > Al Gore started all this by scaring every illeterate person out > > > there into buying one of his carbon eliminators ... > > > > It's time someone did a Carl on you. > > > > Shut up Boob, you're an ignorant cretin who would be fired if I passed half > > of your postings on to your company's HR department. Or did you forget > > that you're posting from a corporate email address? As far as your company > > is concerned your looney-tunes postings about the end times are posted > > under their corporate auspices. Shareholders will simply find that > > unacceptable. If you're lucky you'd be banned from Usenet, more likely > > you'd be shown the door. > > > > Doc. > > what I post on my free time is my business ... It seems you have a plethora of "free time". Do you "work" second shift, and post during the day? Still, you *ARE* using the company's name. At the very least, they may ask that you use a personal e-mail account in your message headers. ...or they may launch an inquiry to see how much free time you have and see if that can be better put to use for the company's benefit (since they're paying you for it). ...and yes, I think your posts are a bit over-the-top. I just hope you don't pick up a cyber-stalker like someone else we know has to deal with. We get enough of those B.S., anonymous/forged/cross-posted posts from those creeps - we don't need any more. -- David J Dachtera dba DJE Systems http://www.djesys.com/ Unofficial OpenVMS Marketing Home Page http://www.djesys.com/vms/market/ Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/ Unofficial OpenVMS-IA32 Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/ia32/ Unofficial OpenVMS Hobbyist Support Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/support/ ------------------------------ Date: 22 Mar 2007 19:17:56 -0700 From: bob@instantwhip.com Subject: Re: ENOUGH! Message-ID: <1174616276.590060.79970@e65g2000hsc.googlegroups.com> On Mar 22, 9:27 pm, David J Dachtera wrote: > b...@instantwhip.com wrote: > > > On Mar 22, 5:03 pm, Doc wrote: > > > b...@instantwhip.com wrote innews:1174596295.832078.316220@n59g2000hsh.googlegroups.com: > > > > > > > > > Al Gore started all this by scaring every illeterate person out > > > > there into buying one of his carbon eliminators ... > > > > It's time someone did a Carl on you. > > > > Shut up Boob, you're an ignorant cretin who would be fired if I passed half > > > of your postings on to your company's HR department. Or did you forget > > > that you're posting from a corporate email address? As far as your company > > > is concerned your looney-tunes postings about the end times are posted > > > under their corporate auspices. Shareholders will simply find that > > > unacceptable. If you're lucky you'd be banned from Usenet, more likely > > > you'd be shown the door. > > > > Doc. > > > what I post on my free time is my business ... > > It seems you have a plethora of "free time". > > Do you "work" second shift, and post during the day? > > Still, you *ARE* using the company's name. At the very least, they may ask that > you use a personal e-mail account in your message headers. > > ...or they may launch an inquiry to see how much free time you have and see if > that can be better put to use for the company's benefit (since they're paying > you for it). > > ...and yes, I think your posts are a bit over-the-top. I just hope you don't > pick up a cyber-stalker like someone else we know has to deal with. We get > enough of those B.S., anonymous/forged/cross-posted posts from those creeps - we > don't need any more. I am not using my companies name ... and we have a thing called breaks, and the company monitors web access so they know who is doing what ... this is common practice ... I believe most companies do this ... you act like this is something new ... ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2007 14:21:07 +1030 From: Jeremy Begg Subject: Re: FTPS Server for OpenVMS (Also posted to the ITRC) Message-ID: <46034EAB.30203@vsm.com.au> Hello Roger, > Yes, we are still in need of an FTPS Server for OpenVMS that runs > under HP's TCPIP stack and uses HP openSSL library. We need a server > not a client. For the client side I have found: KERMIT and CURL. My > company may be willing to let me port one of the open source FTPs > servers to OpenVMS; we have considered one of the following: vsftpd - > used on red hat linux, PureFtp, or ProFTPd. Before we do this I have > several questions: Here's one for you first: what is an FTPS server? Do you mean SFTP (Secure FTP), i.e. a file transfer protocol running over an SSH session? Assuming you really mean SFTP ... > 1. Is OpenVMS engineering working on an FTPs server? I don't want to > take on a possibly many month project if someone is already working on > it. SSH, SFTP, etc are available as part of TCP/IP Services for OpenVMS (I think). > 2. Is there anyone out there needing an FTPS server who might want to > share development effort. I would do the majority of the work, but it > might be nice to have some help. Another commercial SSH/SFTP pacakge is "SSH for OpenVMS" from Process Software LLC. It's a VMS port of the F-Secure SSH package. You can find out more about it from http://www.process.com/tcpip/ssh.html If you don't mean SFTP then I'm afraid I can't help any further. Regards, Jeremy Begg ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2007 12:38:47 -0700 From: "Malcolm Dunnett" Subject: Re: Gore brainwashing world to ban the light bulb! Message-ID: <4602db09$1@flight> "Paul Anderson" wrote in message news:paul.anderson-401C2D.12171122032007@usenet01.boi.hp.com... > Except your heating system is more efficient at heating the air than > incandescent light bulbs. > Is that true even for electric heaters? They both work on the same principal of resistive heat generation. Where are the efficiencies gained? > Paul > > -- > Paul Anderson > OpenVMS Engineering > Hewlett-Packard Company ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2007 17:20:19 -0400 From: JF Mezei Subject: Re: Gore brainwashing world to ban the light bulb! Message-ID: Malcolm Dunnett wrote: > it's dark, so we're heating our houses anyway. If less heat is > released from the light bulbs then more heat will have to be > put into the house through the primary heating system - thus reducing > the net energy savings. If you use a heat pump for instance, on average, each kilowatt of work brings in 3 kilowatts of heat. If an incadescent generates 1 kilowatt of heat for each kilowatt produced (minus a tiny bit for the actual light), it is less efficient than a heat pump. So switching to fluorescent bulbs does same money because you then rely on a much more energy efficient heating device (the heat pump). Also, you need to consider summer: with cooler lightbulbs, you generate less heat in the house and thus reduce air conditioning bills. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2007 16:27:37 -0500 (CDT) From: sms@antinode.org (Steven M. Schweda) Subject: Re: Gore brainwashing world to ban the light bulb! Message-ID: <07032216273737_2020028F@antinode.org> From: "Malcolm Dunnett" > "Paul Anderson" wrote in message > news:paul.anderson-401C2D.12171122032007@usenet01.boi.hp.com... > > > Except your heating system is more efficient at heating the air than > > incandescent light bulbs. > > > Is that true even for electric heaters? They both work on > the same principal of resistive heat generation. Where are > the efficiencies gained? You need to look at the efficiency of making the electricity in the first place. If one burns natural gas to make it, at an efficiency of, say, 35% to 40%, and converts the electricity to heat at (near) 100% efficiency, then how much of the energy of the gas went into heat? Compare that to burning the gas in your own furnace at, say, 70% efficiency (or whatever). 35% is not hard to beat. ("35% to 40%" may be low these days, according to "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fossil_fuel_power_plant", but the best figure cited there is a still-low "approach 60%".) From: "John Wallace" > [...] 1 kilowatt of heat [...] A watt is a power unit, not an energy unit. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Steven M. Schweda sms@antinode-org 382 South Warwick Street (+1) 651-699-9818 Saint Paul MN 55105-2547 ------------------------------ Date: 22 Mar 2007 16:07:18 -0700 From: "AEF" Subject: Re: Gore brainwashing world to ban the light bulb! Message-ID: <1174604838.162226.306110@b75g2000hsg.googlegroups.com> On Mar 22, 1:13 pm, "John Wallace" wrote: > "Paul Anderson" wrote in message > > news:paul.anderson-401C2D.12171122032007@usenet01.boi.hp.com... > > > Except your heating system is more efficient at heating the air than > > incandescent light bulbs. > > How does that work then? > > I put 1 kilowatt of electric power into a light, any kind of light, > tungsten, carbon arc, CFL, I get 1 kilowatt of heat in the room. Efficiency > 100%. > > I put gas or heating oil, at a rate equivalent to 1 kilowatts input power, > into a typical central heating boiler (you call them "furnaces"?) and a good > part of the power input goes up the chimney (flue?). Efficiency maybe 40-70% > depending on various factors (though modern condensing boilers allegedly do > rather better than 90%). Is it really that low? 40-70%? I'd guess it's much higher. > > The electric light/heater is more efficient than gas or oil, on that basis, > because all the energy goes into heating the room rather than some of it > getting wasted up the chimney. > > On that basis, is electricity an appropriate form of energy for room > heating? That's a different question altogether and requires consideration > of factors other than just "efficiency". For example, lots of high tech > stuff (e.g. a VMS system) can run directly off electricity, but are there > any VMS systems that can be powered directly by fossil fuel? > > regards > John Another problem with electricity is loss due to transmission. AEF ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2007 16:11:00 -0700 From: "Malcolm Dunnett" Subject: Re: Gore brainwashing world to ban the light bulb! Message-ID: <46030cbf@flight> "Steven M. Schweda" wrote in message news:07032216273737_2020028F@antinode.org... > You need to look at the efficiency of making the electricity in the > first place. If one burns natural gas to make it, at an efficiency of, > say, 35% to 40%, and converts the electricity to heat at (near) 100% > efficiency, then how much of the energy of the gas went into heat? > Compare that to burning the gas in your own furnace at, say, 70% > efficiency (or whatever). 35% is not hard to beat. ("35% to 40%" may > be low these days, according to > "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fossil_fuel_power_plant", but the best > figure cited there is a still-low "approach 60%".) Most of the power used in this neck of the woods is hydroelectric. I'm not sure how to compare that to burning gas in a furnace. Certainly it has zero greenhouse gas emissions which seem to be the main concern lately. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2007 16:16:17 -0700 From: "Malcolm Dunnett" Subject: Re: Gore brainwashing world to ban the light bulb! Message-ID: <46030dfc$1@flight> "JF Mezei" wrote in message news:c412e$4602f31a$cef8887a$25472@TEKSAVVY.COM... > If you use a heat pump for instance, on average, each kilowatt of work > brings in 3 kilowatts of heat. If an incadescent generates 1 kilowatt of > heat for each kilowatt produced (minus a tiny bit for the actual light), > it is less efficient than a heat pump. So switching to fluorescent bulbs > does same money because you then rely on a much more energy efficient > heating device (the heat pump). Yes, but in the case where one doesn't have a heat pump but rather electric heaters aren't you just exchanging one electrical heat source for another. Granted it's not entirely a zero sum because there are times (in the summer evenings) when one uses lights but not heating. FWIW heat pumps are getting a bad reputation here in BC because they are so noisy. Municipalities are considering banning them. I'm mainly trying to point out that there aren't necessarily any simple solutions. > > Also, you need to consider summer: with cooler lightbulbs, you generate > less heat in the house and thus reduce air conditioning bills. Air conditioning in Canada!!! Surely you jest!!! ------------------------------ Date: 22 Mar 2007 16:08:19 -0700 From: "AEF" Subject: Re: Gore brainwashing world to ban the light bulb! Message-ID: <1174604899.603283.195260@e1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com> On Mar 22, 2:38 pm, "Malcolm Dunnett" wrote: > "Paul Anderson" wrote in message > > news:paul.anderson-401C2D.12171122032007@usenet01.boi.hp.com... > > > Except your heating system is more efficient at heating the air than > > incandescent light bulbs. > > Is that true even for electric heaters? They both work on > the same principal of resistive heat generation. Where are > the efficiencies gained? The efficiency in this case is pretty much the same. > > > Paul > > > -- > > Paul Anderson > > OpenVMS Engineering > > Hewlett-Packard Company AEF ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2007 22:00:42 -0500 From: John Subject: Re: Migrate Hardware Strategy Message-ID: <460342DA.6050509@tx.rr.com> Jerry Alan Braga wrote: > Questions: > ---------- > 1. Does this sound reasonable ? Yes > 2. In (2) above how do I handle the IP addressing and nic card changes > - since the hardware is now identical can I just copy the tcpip$config.dat > file from 1 node to the other, not bring up the tcpip stack on new STIMPY > and reconfigure to change host name and IP address. Or should I just not > bring up the IP stack and reconfigure everything. > - I also use decnet on the second 10/100 nic card for cluster isolated > traffic and internode connect. How is this affected. I suggest that you rebuild the TCPIP and DECnet configuration. For TCPIP TCPIP SHOW INTERFACE TCPIP SET NOINTERFACE interface @SYS$STARTUP:TCPIP$CONFIG For DECnet do not purge objects, etc., just execute @SYS$MANAGER:NETCONFIG I assume DECnet Phase IV It takes a few minutes longer but it can save yourself a headache in the long run. > 3. In (7) above how does the MSA1500 present itself to OpenVMS as far as > drive names. Since this is a cluster I am using port allocation classes via > modparams.dat and the sys$sysdevices.dat has the name of the controllers of > the HSZ70 listed so that VMS always sees them as $3$DKA. How is this done > with the MSA You do not want to use PORT allocation - that is for SCSI interconnect. Dump it! You will not need it - and it will only continue to confuse you. The devices in the SAN will show up as $1$DGAx: I am not familiar with the MSA commands - if they are similar with those of the HSG80 then it is fairly easy - create your devices (mirror-sets, raid-sets, stripe-sets, units) then assign an ID to it - the ID will be your 'x' value in your $1$DGAx: device (above). Each ID must be unique. Also, there are wwwid connections - rename them to the server Primary and server secondary connection. You should be able to assign access to the ID based on the connection name. Familiarize yourself with WWIDMGR - this will allow you to see the SAN devices you create. Keep in mind that at the console prompt (>>>) you will not be able to see these devices. That is until you run wwidmgr. wwidmgr - allows you to set your boot default device. The device drivers for your fiber HBA are not loaded until VMS boots. >>> init >>> wwidmgr -quickset -udid nnn Where nnn is your boot device >>> set bootdef_dev Make sure all available paths are in the string >>> set ffauto on >>> set ffnext on (one of these is static - can't remember which) >>> init >>> boot Hope this helps and have fun! ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2007 14:13:39 +1030 From: Jeremy Begg Subject: Re: Not on latest Roadmap: OpenVMS VAX Version 8.x "under investigation" Message-ID: <1306j7crnt0v9ef@corp.supernews.com> Hi, > In the March 2007 edition of the OpenVMS Rolling Roadmaps at > http://h71000.www7.hp.com/openvms/roadmap/openvms_roadmaps.htm, has > anyone else noticed the absence of the following sentence: > > "The OpenVMS VAX Version 8.x release is under investigation as we > assess > customer demand." > > This statement was still in the roadmap as of December 2006 (and > referred specifically to OpenVMS V8.2). > > Should we read into the statement's deletion/omission that HP has > completed its assessment of customer demand and found it insufficient > to proceed with a VAX release? > That would be my interpretation. I manage about a dozen OpenVMS systems for my customers around Australia, plus another half-dozen here in my office. Only one of those customers still runs VAXes (they also have Alphas) and the reason is largely "it ain't broke, don't fix it", which is probably related to having a minimal maintenance/upgrade budget. So even if a VAX VMS 8.3 update was available, they wouldn't install it on those systems. (I'd probably install it here on my one remaining active VAX, but only for completeness: this machine exists only so I can compile VAX programs.) I have recently helped three businesses (not my regular customers) port their applications from VAX to Integrity. In two of those cases the work went very well and *their* customers can look forward to some shiny new Integrity servers running much faster than any VAX ever. (The third business is running an ancient database system called Userbase for which they don't have the source and is linked against VAX 5.5-2 and can't be VESTed. So for now they're stuck on Charon-VAX but they're investigating options for writing their application from scratch in-house, still on OpenVMS.) In my experience, most VMS customers have already migrated to Alpha and will go to Integrity in due course (depending on the age of their installed systems and their budgets). VMS customers still running on VAX are by-and-large stuck on VAX because of issues which won't be fixed by a VMS upgrade (and in many cases those issues *prevent* a VMS upgrade). Regards, Jeremy Begg ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2007 05:00:44 GMT From: John Santos Subject: Re: Not on latest Roadmap: OpenVMS VAX Version 8.x "under investigation" Message-ID: <0aJMh.8660$EA.3768@trnddc07> Jeremy Begg wrote: > Hi, > >> In the March 2007 edition of the OpenVMS Rolling Roadmaps at >> http://h71000.www7.hp.com/openvms/roadmap/openvms_roadmaps.htm, has >> anyone else noticed the absence of the following sentence: >> >> "The OpenVMS VAX Version 8.x release is under investigation as we >> assess >> customer demand." >> >> This statement was still in the roadmap as of December 2006 (and >> referred specifically to OpenVMS V8.2). >> >> Should we read into the statement's deletion/omission that HP has >> completed its assessment of customer demand and found it insufficient >> to proceed with a VAX release? >> > > That would be my interpretation. I manage about a dozen OpenVMS systems > for my customers around Australia, plus another half-dozen here in my > office. Only one of those customers still runs VAXes (they also have > Alphas) and the reason is largely "it ain't broke, don't fix it", which > is probably related to having a minimal maintenance/upgrade budget. So > even if a VAX VMS 8.3 update was available, they wouldn't install it on > those systems. (I'd probably install it here on my one remaining active > VAX, but only for completeness: this machine exists only so I can > compile VAX programs.) > > I have recently helped three businesses (not my regular customers) port > their applications from VAX to Integrity. In two of those cases the > work went very well and *their* customers can look forward to some shiny > new Integrity servers running much faster than any VAX ever. (The third > business is running an ancient database system called Userbase for which > they don't have the source and is linked against VAX 5.5-2 and can't be > VESTed. So for now they're stuck on Charon-VAX but they're > investigating options for writing their application from scratch > in-house, still on OpenVMS.) > IIRC someone from Ross Systems/NCCS used to post here fairly often. I don't know what the current status of USERBASE is, but he might be able to provide help or migration pointers... BTW, USERBASE uses our product, SELECT, for sorting, merging and selecting data from its databases. SELECT has been ported to Integrity. Email: > In my experience, most VMS customers have already migrated to Alpha and > will go to Integrity in due course (depending on the age of their > installed systems and their budgets). VMS customers still running on > VAX are by-and-large stuck on VAX because of issues which won't be fixed > by a VMS upgrade (and in many cases those issues *prevent* a VMS upgrade). > > Regards, > > Jeremy Begg > -- John Santos Evans Griffiths & Hart, Inc. 781-861-0670 ext 539 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2007 20:13:15 -0500 From: David J Dachtera Subject: Re: Not on latest Roadmap: OpenVMS VAX Version 8.x "under investigation" Message-ID: <460329AB.8897C95F@spam.comcast.net> Bob Koehler wrote: > > In article <9tpbN3lkdcbw@cuebid.zko.hp.com>, brooks@cuebid.zko.hp.nospam (Rob Brooks) writes: > > "Ian Miller" writes: > >> For the last few years at previous events (bootcamps, TUD) etc it was > >> always stated there was no customer demand for another version of VMS > >> for VAX. > >> > >> If anyone knows of demand for a new version then do let HP know, > > > > If anyone plans to "let HP know", you'd be best served by making > > a coherent argument why you *need* it, as opposed to why you'd *like* > > to have it. > > > > Leave out the bleating and vituperative dogma; that won't help your case. > > > > Did customers "demand" VAX-11/VMS 1.x and the 11/780, or was it > DEC's decision that bringing out a 32-bit replacement for the > PDP-11 was good for business? > > If you don't build it, they won't come. ...on the other hand, a lot of stuff *WAS* built - and "they" came, only to be turned away by Bob "GQ" Palmer, Curly, Carly, et al. I'm told by the management of some of my OpenVMS ISVs that HP is going around telling them that HP-UX is the future for Itanic. I'm told by HP management that HP is going around telling OpenVMS customers that HP-UX is the future for Itanic. OpenVMS customers are still coming - and are still being turned away. IBM had "THINK" signs posted all over the company. Perhaps HP has signs all over their company that read "". -- David J Dachtera dba DJE Systems http://www.djesys.com/ Unofficial OpenVMS Marketing Home Page http://www.djesys.com/vms/market/ Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/ Unofficial OpenVMS-IA32 Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/ia32/ Unofficial OpenVMS Hobbyist Support Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/support/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2007 00:19:09 -0400 From: "Stanley F. Quayle" Subject: Re: Not on latest Roadmap: OpenVMS VAX Version 8.x "under investigation" Message-ID: <46031CFD.5182.29EEE6C@squayle.insight.rr.com> On 23 Mar 2007 at 14:13, Jeremy Begg wrote: > (The third business is running an ancient database system called > Userbase for which they don't have the source and is linked against > VAX 5.5-2 and can't be VESTed. Userbase is owned by Ross Systems. There was an Alpha version -- one of my CHARON-AXP clients has it. Would be worth checking out... --Stan Quayle Quayle Consulting Inc. ---------- Stanley F. Quayle, P.E. N8SQ Toll free: 1-888-I-LUV-VAX 8572 North Spring Ct., Pickerington, OH 43147 USA stan-at-stanq-dot-com http://www.stanq.com/charon-vax.html "OpenVMS, when downtime is not an option" ------------------------------ Date: 23 Mar 2007 02:14:35 GMT From: bill@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) Subject: Re: OT: 216 Billion Americans Squirrels Are Scientifically Illiterate (Part 36) Message-ID: <56grgbF29do4vU2@mid.individual.net> In article , JF Mezei writes: > Dr. Dweeb wrote: >> >> The "blame it all on the USA" crowd as usual, miss the point. > > You can't tell/force other nations to do something until you do it too. > > Until the civilised world convinces the USA to curb its emissions and stop > building SUVs, the civilised world doesn't have a chance to convince China, > India and the developping world to also curb their emissions. How many Canadians drive SUV's? What about Europeans? (Just out of curiosity, where do Europeans drive those SUV's wehre they actually require a vehicle that can go "off-road"?) Oh yeah, and let's see. Who makes SUV's? BMW. Mercedes, Volkwagon, Porsche. And that's just Germany!! The US is the civilised world. And I am beginning to think it extends a lot less beyond our borders than I would have given credit for a short time ago. If the rest of the world had spent as much time improving itself like the US did rather than trying to take what their neighbors had instead we would all be living better. bill -- Bill Gunshannon | de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. Three wolves bill@cs.scranton.edu | and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. University of Scranton | Scranton, Pennsylvania | #include ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2007 21:37:54 -0400 From: JF Mezei Subject: OT: 216 Billion Americans Squirrels Are Scientifically Illiterate (Part 36) (P Message-ID: Dr. Dweeb wrote: > > The "blame it all on the USA" crowd as usual, miss the point. You can't tell/force other nations to do something until you do it too. Until the civilised world convinces the USA to curb its emissions and stop building SUVs, the civilised world doesn't have a chance to convince China, India and the developping world to also curb their emissions. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2007 18:19:28 GMT From: Forrest Kenney Subject: Re: USB Support on Alpha Message-ID: <4602BC52.F17E71A1@hp.com> mcbill20@yahoo.com wrote: > > I have seen a few recent posts regarding USB support on Alpha but I am > looking for a little more specific information and hopefully, pointers > to documentation. I understand that it's not cost effective for VMS > engineering to add any more support for Alpha. However, I still am > hoping to be able to talk to certain USB devices on my Alpha. > > In one recent post, someone mentioned that any PCI USB card with the > NEC chipset _should_ work. Does anyone know of any specific brands > that do work? I hate to have to buy several brands just to find one > that may work. There is no list if the card says it is USB High speed capable it is more than likely based on the NEC chip set. They are in well over 90% of all the High speed cards I have seen. You can try purchasing a Belkin add in card. That last I checked they used the NEC chip. But like much of the stuff in the PC world they change things without changing part or model numbers. > > I understand that some of the IA64 machines have some USB support. > However, as I have Alpha systems at present and can't really afford to > buy an Itanium system for hobbyist purposes, I am hoping to make this > work with my current hardware (PWS500, Alphaserver 4100, Alphastation > 255). > You really need to be on V8.3 but with an add in card that uses the NEC chip set you will be ready to go. > Can anyone point me to any documentation and/or code examples of > talking to USB devices? Right now I have quite a few devices that I > communicate with through terminal servers (DS90TL's, DS700's and > DS200MC's). Unfortunately for my hardware situation, most new devices > these days come with USB ports rather than serial ports. Specifically, > I am looking to connect to: 1) UPS, 2) GPS, 3) Power meter. > There is no single document that will tell you how to add support for a random USB device. There is a fairly good book on USB "Universal Serial Bus System Architecture" published by Mindshare. You can go to the www.usb.org and pull down more specification than you can imagine. As of V8.3 we supply a USB Generic Driver that allows you to directly talk to a USB device. There are even some examples there with more coming in the future. But the key thing you need is the protocol message exchange the device requires. Unless you can talk a vendor into giving you that information you have to reverse engineer it using a BUS analyzer and the windows driver that should have come with the device. If you are lucky there may be a Linux driver and you can use that as a a starting point. > While poking around the web I found a kind of "USB terminal server" > made by Keyspan: > > http://www.cdw.com/shop/products/default.aspx?EDC=591105 Don't know about the keyspan but we support a number of USB to RS232 devices. Thers is supposed to be a pointer to them on the OpenVMS web site. If they are not there send mail to Leo.Demers@hp.com asking for the information on USB to RS232 devices. > > I am unable to determine if this would work via a TCP/IP connection > with VMS. I have an e-mail request in to the company and am waiting to > hear back. > > Any ideas? > > Thanks, > Bill Forrest ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2007 18:31:54 -0400 From: JF Mezei Subject: Re: VAX is ENOUGH! Message-ID: <84d3b$460303e1$cef8887a$9709@TEKSAVVY.COM> Doc wrote: > Why are you defending Boob? He's not a hobbyist, he's an employee of a > corporate customer and he is doing a *dreadful* job of representing his > employer. Not wanting to appear to defend him, he is posting his personal opinions from a non representative account. You may know who he works for during the day, but those posts are not associated with his employer and for all you know, this is just another "nomen nescio" stealing someone's name. As much as I may disagree with his personal opinions, he is allowed to have those opinions. The fact that these issues are gaining so much traction in this group is just an indication of the huge divide between people with very raw emotions on either side. ------------------------------ Date: 22 Mar 2007 16:05:31 -0700 From: "AEF" Subject: [OT] Re: Gore brainwashing world to ban the light bulb! Message-ID: <1174604731.507135.190760@e1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com> On Mar 22, 1:54 pm, Paul Anderson wrote: > In article <4602ca9a$0$8753$ed261...@ptn-nntp-reader02.plus.net>, > "John Wallace" wrote: > > > I put 1 kilowatt of electric power into a light, any kind of light, > > tungsten, carbon arc, CFL, I get 1 kilowatt of heat in the room. > > Efficiency 100%. Creating the electiricy in the first place is usually far below 100% efficiency. > > Isn't some of the energy used to make light? Or is it less than .5% > and you are rounding up? I think that somewhere between 5 and 15% of the electricity going through an incandescant light bulp turns into light. But the light bounces around the room and on each bounce a significant fraction of it is absorbed, turning into heat. So unless some of the light goes out the window, 100% of the light eventually ends up as heat anyway. > > > I put gas or heating oil, at a rate equivalent to 1 kilowatts input > > power, into a typical central heating boiler (you call them > > "furnaces"?) and a good part of the power input goes up the chimney > > (flue?). Efficiency maybe 40-70% depending on various factors (though > > modern condensing boilers allegedly do rather better than 90%). > > > The electric light/heater is more efficient than gas or oil, on that > > basis, because all the energy goes into heating the room rather than > > some of it getting wasted up the chimney. > > Why, then, is heating your house with electric heat more expensive than > heating it with a furnace that uses oil or gas? I thought it was due to > the inefficiency of the electric heater, but maybe it's due to the cost > of electricity compared to oil or gas. Good point. While converting electricity into heat is 100% efficient, the creation of that electricity is usually far below 100% efficient. With steam turbines I think the efficiencies are maybe 35% (though I think someone just quoted a higher figure but it is still far below 100%). That's why electric resistance heating is more expensive than gas or oil heat. If you must use electricity to heat, consider a heat pump, which is much more efficient than resistance heating. > > Paul > > -- > Paul Anderson > OpenVMS Engineering > Hewlett-Packard Company AEF ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2007 00:16:19 -0000 From: "John Wallace" Subject: Re: [OT] Re: Gore brainwashing world to ban the light bulb! Message-ID: <46031c55$0$8715$ed2619ec@ptn-nntp-reader02.plus.net> "AEF" wrote in message news:1174604731.507135.190760@e1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com... > > Good point. While converting electricity into heat is 100% efficient, > the creation of that electricity is usually far below 100% efficient. > With steam turbines I think the efficiencies are maybe 35% (though I > think someone just quoted a higher figure but it is still far below > 100%). That's why electric resistance heating is more expensive than > gas or oil heat. If you must use electricity to heat, consider a heat > pump, which is much more efficient than resistance heating. > The overall efficiency of traditional electricity generation from fossil fuels is indeed not good. There are other electricity generation methods which don't have the wasteful inefficiencies of fossil-fueled thermal power generation. There are also other ways of increasing the overall efficiency in a fossil-fueled setup, such as using the waste heat in a combined heat and power system (what used to be called "district heating", for example). The answers aren't necessarily simple, but they're generally not new and untested either. They're just not widely deployed, perhaps because the economics haven't been attractive so far. Actually from what I've seen of ground-source heat pump systems, they seem to be commonly associated with hot water underfloor heating (because the heat from the heat pumps is low temperature heat, inappropriate for radiators). The ones I've seen look worryingly complicated for a domestic setup. I'm not sure I'd yet class them as having all the necessary reliability availability and serviceability features. But you have to start somewhere. regards john ------------------------------ End of INFO-VAX 2007.163 ************************