Hoped for answer: WT with the TB will handily beat GRRM.
I think I can safely say that no Game of Thrones books will be "type on a textblade".
Sadly though, MK’s WT and the GR of the TB will not beat the televised series finale of GoT.
One more episode, so no chance. Nor their spinoff (coming in 2021, 2022?), if we are to believe all the uncertainties WT and DBK described.
Like Planet Earth in the HitchHiker's Guide to the Galaxy, DBK is surely "mostly harmless". There's no way possible that DBK is Joffrey, a certain CEO would be your more likely candidate there.
I'd say DBK is more like Podrick - a regular guy just trying to do the right thing, and always learning to do better.
Maybe there's a bit of Baldric mixed in with the Podrick there too, what with all the cunning plans to explain and rationalise, but as has been advised, and has per the forum rules, let's keep it clean - I've already been advised once by AI Admin and we don't need to be advised again, not when we have such a nice discussion going on.
Indeed, despite MK/WT's silence for the time being, this is the only neutral forum he responds on, the only one left where customers past, present and future can (effectively) openly discuss things with a chance that MK/WT will say something, even if that something is nothing that we want to hear.
Of course, there is that excellent Reddit forum, and there are even other places, but this AI forum is the only neutral ground, a bit like that hotel in the John Wick stories, so let's keep it that way. :-)
> Just because you made something go faster doesn't necessarily result in benefit, more on the contrary. This is not a 'programming' concept, it's common sense.
So if cleaning up code makes it faster, they should artificially slow it down. Of course, the steps to do that could also introduce problems so, once again, it isn't as clear cut as some want to believe.
> "Feature freeze" is a concept and phrase agreed upon by "professional programmers" and "experts" who's thought about these things and is used to combat unnecessary mucking with code. Nobody cares whether you don't like the term, or you don't find it rock solid, or any such misguided interpretation on your part.
I'm well aware of that, yet we have already seen people who act like they know more than me fail to be consistent. I simply recognized that from the start.
> The dumbest thing to do is to clear up memory, just because... Is it for additional features, stability, speed increase, what? Doing it for some unknown future fixes(?) or possible updates is probably the second dumbest reason.
Don't believe they were talking about having more memory free for operations. They may be doing that too, but what they talked about was memory for the program. You can't alter your argument now, after making a big deal about how I supposedly couldn't have done what I, in fact, did do, with just 16k of ram. That ram was about the program and the data. There may be all kinds of other things, but they weren't the focus.
> You feign "expertise" because you advocate Waytools actions without knowing anything more than the rest of us.
I'm pretty sure giving an opinion on something and explaining why is not the same as claiming expertise. Nor do I advocate WT actions. I support some. I disagree with some. But mostly I just include reasonable possibilities rather than just insist it must only be one way.
> And you throw out a lot of technical-sounding buzzwords (which you don't understand) or by poo-poo'ing other tried-and-true terms (which again you don't understand).
There you go, using your expertise as a way to ridicule. Thank you for demonstrating my point on that.
> Post some of your old 'BASIC AND machine code' on Github so we can check it out.
Strange statement from someone who says he could care less!
Kahuna, that's not meant as an attack. It's common practice amongst programmers to tell someone to throw the code onto github for review. It can even mean he shows greater interest than before.
Context please. He said he didn't care about my programming stuff, yet he made it an issue in the first place!
Interesting. I did a little research into assembly language for adding numbers. Now, I still don't recall the details of what I did, but I recognized enough to see that adding up all the scores for a student would be quite easy. I saw variations, but basically it would just require:
Load the ascii code from the address holding the first grade (which would have been already identified) into a register.
Load the next code from the next address - simple incrementation process as all grades were consecutive. Add them into another register with, wait for it, the ADD instruction! just keep a loop going for the number of times to match the total number of grades. Also saw steps for multiplication and division which, while more complicated, were not very long at all.
it was none other than TBD who made my programming an issue in post 835:
You introduced the topic of your 'programming' to this thread to make a point or analogy about something. You analogize everything rather than discussing the issues at hand.
What would you say they should do when a rewrite results in faster response? Are you going to say they should throw in an artificial delay?
No. That is not what we were talking about. Refactoring code without modifying the underlying feature whatsoever is a different topic. We are not on that topic. The topic was 12 jumps vs 6. You introduced the topic with that example and said its not a new feature. You are completely wrong about that.
Getting you to understand something is as futile as as getting Mark Knighton to release his keyboard. You are dead set on being wrong.
You introduced the topic of your 'programming' to this thread to make a point or analogy about something.
Let's see, the issue had to do with programming. I gave an example and, gasp, I chose one from my own experience! But it wasn't about me, it was a point about programming. You made it about me.
Interesting. I did a little research into assembly language for adding numbers. Now, I still don't recall the details of what I did, but I recognized enough to see that adding up all the scores for a student would be quite easy. I saw variations, but basically it would just require:
Load the ascii code from the address holding the first grade (which would have been already identified) into a register.
Load the next code from the next address - simple incrementation process as all grades were consecutive. Add them into another register with, wait for it, the ADD instruction! just keep a loop going for the number of times to match the total number of grades. Also saw steps for multiplication and division which, while more complicated, were not very long at all.
I said I do not care about your 'programming' because ultimately you are all talk and all BS. No programmer would write the above paragraphs. They would write the code derived from the research and post it. Everything you talk about makes it clear you are clueless.
The fact that you did some research into your grade school level 'programming' exploits in the distant past is a positive sign though. Its a more productive use of your time than shilling for Waytools or trying to argue things you do not understand.
Try spending more of your time on productive tasks Kahuna. Download Xcode. Learn a new language. Learn how to do something besides talk.
I said I do not care about your 'programming' because ultimately you are all talk and all BS. No programmer would write the above paragraphs. They would write the code derived from the research and post it.
That's weird, because I did program and I wrote the above paragraphs!
Meanwhile, why on earth would I still have code I wrote for a computer and a chip which doesn't even exist anymore, especially when I no longer program?
By the time I moved on to other computers, there were other app solutions so I didn't need to start from scratch anymore. And here's another shocker for you - I no longer have the cassettes the program was stored on either!
BTW, you are still making it about my programming.
dabigkahuna said: especially when I no longer program?
Do something productive Kahuna. What you are doing here is not good.
I'm pretty sure I don't base what is good and not good by your opinions. Maybe it would have worked better for you if you didn't say you didn't care about my programming after you made it an issue.
dabigkahuna said: especially when I no longer program?
Do something productive Kahuna. What you are doing here is not good.
I'm pretty sure I don't base what is good and not good by your opinions. Maybe it would have worked better for you if you didn't say you didn't care about my programming after you made it an issue.
Worked better me? lolz I am pretty sure your whole purpose for existing is to bicker pointlessly. What a waste.
I am pretty sure your whole purpose for existing is to bicker pointlessly. What a waste.
Yet all I did was post an example about programming that I personally experienced. You made my programming an issue. So it seems you don't mind wasting time with bickering. You just seem to have a problem if someone doesn't let you get away with it.
I said I do not care about your 'programming' because ultimately you are all talk and all BS. No programmer would write the above paragraphs. They would write the code derived from the research and post it.
That's weird, because I did program and I wrote the above paragraphs!
Meanwhile, why on earth would I still have code I wrote for a computer and a chip which doesn't even exist anymore, especially when I no longer program?
By the time I moved on to other computers, there were other app solutions so I didn't need to start from scratch anymore. And here's another shocker for you - I no longer have the cassettes the program was stored on either!
BTW, you are still making it about my programming.
Xcode and Swift are the development environment and programming language for iOS devices. In amongst everything else TBD is or isn't saying, he is definitely suggesting that you could try your hand at a programming language for the world's most popular computing devices, and that maybe, just maybe, you'll find that you enjoy it (and that it could, perchance and perhaps, be a far more satisfying use of your time).
Anyway you have said the programming was decades ago, and that you were hacking things together rather than coming from a pure programming perspective where you were deeply schooled in programming the way a true programmer would have been, so it is certainly fair to cut you some slack in this regard.
Cutting MK and WT some slack on the lack of a GR TB, which has caused some people to be jack of the company, is a different thing entirely.
In any case, checking out Xcode and Swift, via the links shared in a previous post above, may well tickle your 2019 programming fancy (should it still exist) and that, at least, is a genuine attempt by TBD to pique your interest in modern programming, something that is much easier today than in 1979, seeing as Swift wasn't invented until about 5 or so years ago :-)
You might even want to, for simple fun and scientific curiosity, see if you can recreate your programs of old with modern languages, just to see how hard or easy it is, or you could, at least, investigate it, even if from a bird's eye view rather than delving into it as a foot soldier in a face-to-face Saving Private Ryanton type of situation.
Of course, whether or not that was the case would be entirely up to you, given your personal circumstances, the amount of other things you want to do with your life, how much time you want to assign to future WT/TB issues and the great countdown of life that counts down for us all.
May the force be with you, and I don't think you have any case to be worried about anyone ever figuring out who you are - it's Darth Wayder people want to see brought to the light side of the force - your efforts will be well rewarded and your analogizing will come to a natural end once TB goes GR, because the damn thing will be launched and the trigger of the treggerhood will finally be complete.
Until TextBlade 2.0, of course, whereupon the whole saga might start again, and whereupon your mighty skills in wordsmithery and analogizationery may well be called up again to defend the faithful and bring forth the 2.0 revolution, after which we will sail forth towards 3.0, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera.
Until then, we can all go grrrrrr about the lack of GR, after which we will all be like Tony the Frosted Flakes Tiger and exclaim... Grrrrrrrrreat!
> you could try your hand at a programming language
I only programmed because, at the time, there was nothing any good for my needs. As I said, when I moved on to other computers, there were spreadsheet (and database) programs that I could manipulate to get most of what I needed. While maybe I could have made something a bit better for my personal preferences, it sure wasn't worth the time to do it from scratch! I've never had a big urge to program - it was only need that led me to do any.
Now, if we are talking about getting other programmers to write something to work the way I wanted, that would be an interest of mine because I have lots of ideas, but I'm not interested enough to spend that kind of money, even assuming the programmers wouldn't try to do something the way they think it should be done. I ran into that a lot when figuring out a grade book for Excel. I explained that I wanted to use sensible code letters for the kinds of things a teacher keeps daily track of. Some examples:
Excused absence, unexcused absence, Excused tardy, Unexcused tardy, No homework, Disciplinary action. A typical teacher would enter these in a grade book as: AaTtHD (note there is a pattern - bad things are in upper case). Not only did you have to have the program keep track of how many of each character (counting upper and lower case as separate entries), you could have more than one of these in the same cell.
I was amazed when on Excel focused forums how I was told over and over that I'd need to have separate cells for each item - can you imagine the mess with 3 cells for each day just for these things? And they said I couldn't separate upper and lower case either as all "T"s would be counted without regard to the case. So they started telling me how I needed to take a different approach "more appropriate" to the modern age of computers. Which was essentially saying, "We can't do it the way teachers want so change it to the way we can program it". Well, I kept after it until finally someone showed me how to set up a formula that would do exactly what I needed, not what a programmer thought I needed.
You see, it isn't that I was some great programmer that led me to create my old gradebook program that worked so well compared to others I saw. It was just my view that the computer had the power to do what I wanted, but no one had taken the time to figure it out. I did. So you might say that stubbornness beat skills.
I'll even give a small example of something I think I Apple should change. I sure don't know the programming necessary, but I'd bet Apple has ones who could, but somehow they keep missing this: Let us change the font size when looking at App Store items. That is, let you enlarge (or shrink) them just like you can do with pretty much any browser. Considering how small their default font is, this is even more important. I end up having to zoom in and scroll around to read the page! That's ridiculous.
> Cutting MK and WT some slack on the lack of a TB, which has caused some people to be jack of the company, is a different thing entirely.
Depends on what it is.
I still find it odd that I have posted agreement with key points some critics have made, but because I refuse to let unsupported criticisms go unchallenged, why would anyone view that as a problem? Want to complain about lack of communication? I've agreed. Complain about banning and forced refunds? I've partly agreed. Want to start telling us exactly what they are doing when in fact, we don't have that detail yet? Then I'm going to point out that assumptions are being made. Want to claim I'm paid by WT? I'll point out it is a lie based on nothing more than the fact I don't agree with everything the critics say. All very straight-forward.
> Just because you made something go faster doesn't necessarily result in benefit, more on the contrary. This is not a 'programming' concept, it's common sense.
So if cleaning up code makes it faster, they should artificially slow it down. Of course, the steps to do that could also introduce problems so, once again, it isn't as clear cut as some want to believe.
It is clear when it's "FIRMWARE". Did you miss the part where they said "FIRMWARE"? Do you even know what "FIRMWARE" is? In the 8-bit days, they may have called this "ROM". Do you know "ROM"? It's not a userland app like your grading program written in BASIC. It's low-level programming where timing matters a great deal, because "FIRMWARE" tends to deal with hardware which have timing built in to them.
> "Feature freeze" is a concept and phrase agreed upon by "professional programmers" and "experts" who's thought about these things and is used to combat unnecessary mucking with code. Nobody cares whether you don't like the term, or you don't find it rock solid, or any such misguided interpretation on your part.
I'm well aware of that, yet we have already seen people who act like they know more than me fail to be consistent. I simply recognized that from the start.
You're the one who insisted it's not a rock-solid concept, because what? You know more?
> The dumbest thing to do is to clear up memory, just because... Is it for additional features, stability, speed increase, what? Doing it for some unknown future fixes(?) or possible updates is probably the second dumbest reason.
Don't believe they were talking about having more memory free for operations. They may be doing that too, but what they talked about was memory for the program. You can't alter your argument now, after making a big deal about how I supposedly couldn't have done what I, in fact, did do, with just 16k of ram. That ram was about the program and the data. There may be all kinds of other things, but they weren't the focus.
It's not a program, it's "FIRMWARE". Do you know "FIRMWARE"? They operate differently than your grading program. You do know that there are differences in a software stack, that userland programs and "FIRMWARE" are on different levels? Do you?
> You feign "expertise" because you advocate Waytools actions without knowing anything more than the rest of us.
I'm pretty sure giving an opinion on something and explaining why is not the same as claiming expertise. Nor do I advocate WT actions. I support some. I disagree with some. But mostly I just include reasonable possibilities rather than just insist it must only be one way.
See above.
> And you throw out a lot of technical-sounding buzzwords (which you don't understand) or by poo-poo'ing other tried-and-true terms (which again you don't understand).
There you go, using your expertise as a way to ridicule. Thank you for demonstrating my point on that.
I'm not an "expert", you're just woefully ignorant. If one has to yell because you can't hear, don't think of it as a ridicule. Just know that you're deaf.
Let us change the font size when looking at App Store items. That is, let you enlarge (or shrink) them just like you can do with pretty much any browser. Considering how small their default font is, this is even more important. I end up having to zoom in and scroll around to read the page! That's ridiculous.
Hi DBK,
On iOS, you can go to General, then Display and Brightness, then Text Size, and if you increase that, it will increase the size of the text everywhere, including the App Store.
On a Mac, you can go to System Preferences, then Displays, then choose a lower resolution, which will increase the text size. You can then change the resolution back to normal once you have found and installed your apps.
I wholeheartedly agree that a simple font resizing button or buttons would be quicker and easier, but you can always use this when going through the App Store to increase the font size rather than zooming the entire screen larger or smaller.
It may not be a perfect solution - indeed, it is a hassle, but it's a workaround - and you won't need to join the TREG secret society to take advantage of it :-)
> Just because you made something go faster doesn't necessarily result in benefit, more on the contrary. This is not a 'programming' concept, it's common sense.
So if cleaning up code makes it faster, they should artificially slow it down. Of course, the steps to do that could also introduce problems so, once again, it isn't as clear cut as some want to believe.
It is clear when it's "FIRMWARE". Did you miss the part where they said "FIRMWARE"? Do you even know what "FIRMWARE" is? In the 8-bit days, they may have called this "ROM". Do you know "ROM"? It's not a userland app like your grading program written in BASIC. It's low-level programming where timing matters a great deal, because "FIRMWARE" tends to deal with hardware which have timing built in to them.
> "Feature freeze" is a concept and phrase agreed upon by "professional programmers" and "experts" who's thought about these things and is used to combat unnecessary mucking with code. Nobody cares whether you don't like the term, or you don't find it rock solid, or any such misguided interpretation on your part.
I'm well aware of that, yet we have already seen people who act like they know more than me fail to be consistent. I simply recognized that from the start.
You're the one who insisted it's not a rock-solid concept, because what? You know more?
> The dumbest thing to do is to clear up memory, just because... Is it for additional features, stability, speed increase, what? Doing it for some unknown future fixes(?) or possible updates is probably the second dumbest reason.
Don't believe they were talking about having more memory free for operations. They may be doing that too, but what they talked about was memory for the program. You can't alter your argument now, after making a big deal about how I supposedly couldn't have done what I, in fact, did do, with just 16k of ram. That ram was about the program and the data. There may be all kinds of other things, but they weren't the focus.
It's not a program, it's "FIRMWARE". Do you know "FIRMWARE"? They operate differently than your grading program. You do know that there are differences in a software stack, that userland programs and "FIRMWARE" are on different levels? Do you?
> You feign "expertise" because you advocate Waytools actions without knowing anything more than the rest of us.
I'm pretty sure giving an opinion on something and explaining why is not the same as claiming expertise. Nor do I advocate WT actions. I support some. I disagree with some. But mostly I just include reasonable possibilities rather than just insist it must only be one way.
See above.
> And you throw out a lot of technical-sounding buzzwords (which you don't understand) or by poo-poo'ing other tried-and-true terms (which again you don't understand).
There you go, using your expertise as a way to ridicule. Thank you for demonstrating my point on that.
I'm not an "expert", you're just woefully ignorant. If one has to yell because you can't hear, don't think of it as a ridicule. Just know that you're deaf.
Eric, getting angry at DBK is pointless. He's not the person who is truly responsible for the problems WB is having with getting TB to GR. There's someone else who writes in weird self-assured and smug ways that is the true target of your ire.
DBK is "mostly harmless" per the HGTTG, Podrick and Baldric examples, merged into one. Forgive him, Ericpeets, for he clearly knows not what he does, and if he does know, well, he's not the true source of the trouble.
Rousing at DBK might salve your frustrations somewhat, but it's ultimately pointless, he does not control GR, developers, MK or anything else, beyond, at this point, your emotions.
Let DBK be DBK - it's what he does, and nothing you or I say will ever change that. He will happily defend, rationalise, analogise and all the things he does until the end of time, the end of WT or the end of TREG, whichever comes first, and attacking him is a pointless endeavour.
If GR is achieved, DBK's defense of TB will end. His usefulness to MK will cease, everyone will get a TB and that will be that. Unless the aforementioned TB 2.0 process starts up in an identical manner to what happened with TB 1.0.
If GR is never achieved because WT goes bankrupt, well, he'll be just as TB-less as you or I, but it will be far worse for him because he will have spent the last four years with a TB, and then when it gets switched off because the WT servers die because it was never a final unit that could presumably just be used as a bluetooth keyboard, he will have to return to the (supposed) horror of normal keyboards.
All those TREG users will have their TB's go to digital heaven (or hell, depending on your point of view) and they'll have tasted freedom, tasted love, and then lost it forever.
So, continue to bait and attack DBK if you must, but he's just a proxy for the true target for your ire, which is MK.
MK is the true big kahuna, unless of course we have been played by MK adopting two personas just for fun and to troll us all - it may well be that DBK is MK, but I doubt it, even MK must value his time, although who knows.
Anyway, MK's writing style is VASTLY different to that of DBK, so at the risk of sounding like some Britney Spears defender, it's probably time to leave DBK alone.
MK is the true source of the WT delays, and DBK is just a pawn in the game, as most of us are.
Karma will hopefully checkmate MK if he continues on the path he's been on for 4+ years, and without us a: individuals having any true power in the finalisation of the TB process, we can only hope that MK, despite his weird ways, finds a way to achieve his goal(s), so it turns out that instead of playing checkers, MK really was playing 3D Chess the entire time.
All we have is hope left. HOPE - Hold On, Pain Ends as the advertising signs say in the city I live in, for those suffering with pain. I haven’t looked at those posters too closely but that’s what they say and how the acronym is explained.
HOTC - Hold On, Textblades Come is the last hope we have left, unless those suggestions of complaints to the FTC and lawsuits mentioned in much earlier comments have any reality behind them.
In the meantime, DBK will be DBK, and clearly, nothing and no-one will ever change him, so all we can do is nothing. Twas ever thus. MK, I hope you are doing something real, and not just screwing with us all, which would be extremely cruel and something, despite the really cruel things MK has already demonstrably done, I sincerely hope isn't true.
Who has the money? Certainly not DBK, or at least, I highly doubt it. He has, supposedly, two pre-release TB's, which is two more than you or I have. MK has the money, let's hope that in the end, he spends it on development and delivery.
Good luck MK, and for whatever it's worth, good luck to DBK too, and to me, and you.
Typed on a MB Air 3rd-gen Keyboard, which works just fine, although it sure would have been nice if this was typed on a TextBlade delivered in March 2015 as originally promised, and lied about thereafter so many, many times, to the eternal shame of its creators.
Build - Nice aluminum base. Very sturdy. Not light, not too heavy. Compact for a full 104 key keyboard. Well made. Looks good.
RGB lights - Nice. Perhaps 2 of the static backlight modes are useful. The other modes with flashing LEDs are just distracting eye candy and its annoying to click through all of them to get back to the one you want.
Bluetooth - Works fine. "Jumps" between 3 machines very quickly. Easy to configure.
Key caps - Ok. Flat, not concave. A little wiggly. Not bad. Not great.
Key switches - Fail. For what is supposed to be a 'clicky' mechanical keyboard, these are not good at all. The 'clicky' mechanism is actually just a separate mechanism in the key switch that makes the 'click' sound independently of the switch that actuates and triggers a character from a keypress. The problem is, if you just barely press the keys, they trigger a character before the 'click' ever occurs, and some keys are more sensitive than others. The spacebar is terrible. If you barely rest your thumb on it, it starts triggering spaces. If my hand barely touches the Control key bottom left, then it engages while I am typing, thus producing control-chars that do something unexpected.
Basically they implemented a 'mechanical switch' that is really not mechanical at all, they are just really sensitive keys with a mechanism that 'clicks' when you push the key down far enough. The physical feel of the key presses is not so bad, but the keys are too sensitive and its confusing because they are actuating before the 'click'. It kind of works if you try not to think about it, but its really the opposite of how a mechanical keyboard is supposed to feel and behave, so overall its no good, and I am going to return it.
I have no expectation of the Textblade ever being released, so I guess I will have to try some of those boutique/enthusiast keyboards that are available in different places and see how it goes.
Did you miss the part where they said "FIRMWARE"? Do you even know what "FIRMWARE" is? In the 8-bit days, they may have called this "ROM". Do you know "ROM"? It's not a userland app like your grading program written in BASIC. It's low-level programming where timing matters a great deal, because "FIRMWARE" tends to deal with hardware which have timing built in to them.
It's not a program, it's "FIRMWARE". Do you know "FIRMWARE"? They operate differently than your grading program. You do know that there are differences in a software stack, that userland programs and "FIRMWARE" are on different levels? Do you?
1. I’m well aware of what firmware is, and ROMs, etc. I’m also aware that it doesn’t mean much to say, “It’s firmware, not a basic program” because, gee, there are all these timing things. So? You act like whatever the present speed is for firmware, that it is ONLY because of some fundamental requirement of timing on the hardware - as if it isn’t ALSO sometimes about the programming. Which brings us to:
2. The firmware is programming! And the programming can be cleaned up and run faster without necessarily causing problems.
Comments
I think I can safely say that no Game of Thrones books will be "type on a textblade".
One more episode, so no chance.
Nor their spinoff (coming in 2021, 2022?), if we are to believe all the uncertainties WT and DBK described.
I'd say DBK is more like Podrick - a regular guy just trying to do the right thing, and always learning to do better.
Maybe there's a bit of Baldric mixed in with the Podrick there too, what with all the cunning plans to explain and rationalise, but as has been advised, and has per the forum rules, let's keep it clean - I've already been advised once by AI Admin and we don't need to be advised again, not when we have such a nice discussion going on.
Indeed, despite MK/WT's silence for the time being, this is the only neutral forum he responds on, the only one left where customers past, present and future can (effectively) openly discuss things with a chance that MK/WT will say something, even if that something is nothing that we want to hear.
Of course, there is that excellent Reddit forum, and there are even other places, but this AI forum is the only neutral ground, a bit like that hotel in the John Wick stories, so let's keep it that way. :-)
So if cleaning up code makes it faster, they should artificially slow it down. Of course, the steps to do that could also introduce problems so, once again, it isn't as clear cut as some want to believe.
> "Feature freeze" is a concept and phrase agreed upon by "professional programmers" and "experts" who's thought about these things and is used to combat unnecessary mucking with code. Nobody cares whether you don't like the term, or you don't find it rock solid, or any such misguided interpretation on your part.
I'm well aware of that, yet we have already seen people who act like they know more than me fail to be consistent. I simply recognized that from the start.
> The dumbest thing to do is to clear up memory, just because... Is it for additional features, stability, speed increase, what? Doing it for some unknown future fixes(?) or possible updates is probably the second dumbest reason.
Don't believe they were talking about having more memory free for operations. They may be doing that too, but what they talked about was memory for the program. You can't alter your argument now, after making a big deal about how I supposedly couldn't have done what I, in fact, did do, with just 16k of ram. That ram was about the program and the data. There may be all kinds of other things, but they weren't the focus.
> You feign "expertise" because you advocate Waytools actions without knowing anything more than the rest of us.
I'm pretty sure giving an opinion on something and explaining why is not the same as claiming expertise. Nor do I advocate WT actions. I support some. I disagree with some. But mostly I just include reasonable possibilities rather than just insist it must only be one way.
> And you throw out a lot of technical-sounding buzzwords (which you don't understand) or by poo-poo'ing other tried-and-true terms (which again you don't understand).
There you go, using your expertise as a way to ridicule. Thank you for demonstrating my point on that.
Load the ascii code from the address holding the first grade (which would have been already identified) into a register.
Load the next code from the next address - simple incrementation process as all grades were consecutive. Add them into another register with, wait for it, the ADD instruction! just keep a loop going for the number of times to match the total number of grades. Also saw steps for multiplication and division which, while more complicated, were not very long at all.
No. That is not what we were talking about. Refactoring code without modifying the underlying feature whatsoever is a different topic. We are not on that topic. The topic was 12 jumps vs 6. You introduced the topic with that example and said its not a new feature. You are completely wrong about that.
Getting you to understand something is as futile as as getting Mark Knighton to release his keyboard. You are dead set on being wrong.
The fact that you did some research into your grade school level 'programming' exploits in the distant past is a positive sign though. Its a more productive use of your time than shilling for Waytools or trying to argue things you do not understand.
Try spending more of your time on productive tasks Kahuna. Download Xcode. Learn a new language. Learn how to do something besides talk.
Teach yourself Swift. You will like it.
https://developer.apple.com/swift-playgrounds/
https://swift.org/documentation/
https://developer.apple.com/documentation/swift
Meanwhile, why on earth would I still have code I wrote for a computer and a chip which doesn't even exist anymore, especially when I no longer program?
By the time I moved on to other computers, there were other app solutions so I didn't need to start from scratch anymore. And here's another shocker for you - I no longer have the cassettes the program was stored on either!
BTW, you are still making it about my programming.
Anyway you have said the programming was decades ago, and that you were hacking things together rather than coming from a pure programming perspective where you were deeply schooled in programming the way a true programmer would have been, so it is certainly fair to cut you some slack in this regard.
Cutting MK and WT some slack on the lack of a GR TB, which has caused some people to be jack of the company, is a different thing entirely.
In any case, checking out Xcode and Swift, via the links shared in a previous post above, may well tickle your 2019 programming fancy (should it still exist) and that, at least, is a genuine attempt by TBD to pique your interest in modern programming, something that is much easier today than in 1979, seeing as Swift wasn't invented until about 5 or so years ago :-)
You might even want to, for simple fun and scientific curiosity, see if you can recreate your programs of old with modern languages, just to see how hard or easy it is, or you could, at least, investigate it, even if from a bird's eye view rather than delving into it as a foot soldier in a face-to-face Saving Private Ryanton type of situation.
Of course, whether or not that was the case would be entirely up to you, given your personal circumstances, the amount of other things you want to do with your life, how much time you want to assign to future WT/TB issues and the great countdown of life that counts down for us all.
May the force be with you, and I don't think you have any case to be worried about anyone ever figuring out who you are - it's Darth Wayder people want to see brought to the light side of the force - your efforts will be well rewarded and your analogizing will come to a natural end once TB goes GR, because the damn thing will be launched and the trigger of the treggerhood will finally be complete.
Until TextBlade 2.0, of course, whereupon the whole saga might start again, and whereupon your mighty skills in wordsmithery and analogizationery may well be called up again to defend the faithful and bring forth the 2.0 revolution, after which we will sail forth towards 3.0, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera.
Until then, we can all go grrrrrr about the lack of GR, after which we will all be like Tony the Frosted Flakes Tiger and exclaim... Grrrrrrrrreat!
I only programmed because, at the time, there was nothing any good for my needs. As I said, when I moved on to other computers, there were spreadsheet (and database) programs that I could manipulate to get most of what I needed. While maybe I could have made something a bit better for my personal preferences, it sure wasn't worth the time to do it from scratch! I've never had a big urge to program - it was only need that led me to do any.
Now, if we are talking about getting other programmers to write something to work the way I wanted, that would be an interest of mine because I have lots of ideas, but I'm not interested enough to spend that kind of money, even assuming the programmers wouldn't try to do something the way they think it should be done. I ran into that a lot when figuring out a grade book for Excel. I explained that I wanted to use sensible code letters for the kinds of things a teacher keeps daily track of. Some examples:
Excused absence, unexcused absence, Excused tardy, Unexcused tardy, No homework, Disciplinary action. A typical teacher would enter these in a grade book as:
AaTtHD (note there is a pattern - bad things are in upper case). Not only did you have to have the program keep track of how many of each character (counting upper and lower case as separate entries), you could have more than one of these in the same cell.
I was amazed when on Excel focused forums how I was told over and over that I'd need to have separate cells for each item - can you imagine the mess with 3 cells for each day just for these things? And they said I couldn't separate upper and lower case either as all "T"s would be counted without regard to the case. So they started telling me how I needed to take a different approach "more appropriate" to the modern age of computers. Which was essentially saying, "We can't do it the way teachers want so change it to the way we can program it". Well, I kept after it until finally someone showed me how to set up a formula that would do exactly what I needed, not what a programmer thought I needed.
You see, it isn't that I was some great programmer that led me to create my old gradebook program that worked so well compared to others I saw. It was just my view that the computer had the power to do what I wanted, but no one had taken the time to figure it out. I did. So you might say that stubbornness beat skills.
I'll even give a small example of something I think I Apple should change. I sure don't know the programming necessary, but I'd bet Apple has ones who could, but somehow they keep missing this: Let us change the font size when looking at App Store items. That is, let you enlarge (or shrink) them just like you can do with pretty much any browser. Considering how small their default font is, this is even more important. I end up having to zoom in and scroll around to read the page! That's ridiculous.
> Cutting MK and WT some slack on the lack of a TB, which has caused some people to be jack of the company, is a different thing entirely.
Depends on what it is.
I still find it odd that I have posted agreement with key points some critics have made, but because I refuse to let unsupported criticisms go unchallenged, why would anyone view that as a problem? Want to complain about lack of communication? I've agreed. Complain about banning and forced refunds? I've partly agreed. Want to start telling us exactly what they are doing when in fact, we don't have that detail yet? Then I'm going to point out that assumptions are being made. Want to claim I'm paid by WT? I'll point out it is a lie based on nothing more than the fact I don't agree with everything the critics say. All very straight-forward.
You're the one who insisted it's not a rock-solid concept, because what? You know more?
It's not a program, it's "FIRMWARE". Do you know "FIRMWARE"? They operate differently than your grading program. You do know that there are differences in a software stack, that userland programs and "FIRMWARE" are on different levels? Do you?
See above.
On iOS, you can go to General, then Display and Brightness, then Text Size, and if you increase that, it will increase the size of the text everywhere, including the App Store.
On a Mac, you can go to System Preferences, then Displays, then choose a lower resolution, which will increase the text size. You can then change the resolution back to normal once you have found and installed your apps.
I wholeheartedly agree that a simple font resizing button or buttons would be quicker and easier, but you can always use this when going through the App Store to increase the font size rather than zooming the entire screen larger or smaller.
It may not be a perfect solution - indeed, it is a hassle, but it's a workaround - and you won't need to join the TREG secret society to take advantage of it :-)
Cheers
Alex.
Eric, getting angry at DBK is pointless. He's not the person who is truly responsible for the problems WB is having with getting TB to GR. There's someone else who writes in weird self-assured and smug ways that is the true target of your ire.
DBK is "mostly harmless" per the HGTTG, Podrick and Baldric examples, merged into one. Forgive him, Ericpeets, for he clearly knows not what he does, and if he does know, well, he's not the true source of the trouble.
Rousing at DBK might salve your frustrations somewhat, but it's ultimately pointless, he does not control GR, developers, MK or anything else, beyond, at this point, your emotions.
Let DBK be DBK - it's what he does, and nothing you or I say will ever change that. He will happily defend, rationalise, analogise and all the things he does until the end of time, the end of WT or the end of TREG, whichever comes first, and attacking him is a pointless endeavour.
If GR is achieved, DBK's defense of TB will end. His usefulness to MK will cease, everyone will get a TB and that will be that. Unless the aforementioned TB 2.0 process starts up in an identical manner to what happened with TB 1.0.
If GR is never achieved because WT goes bankrupt, well, he'll be just as TB-less as you or I, but it will be far worse for him because he will have spent the last four years with a TB, and then when it gets switched off because the WT servers die because it was never a final unit that could presumably just be used as a bluetooth keyboard, he will have to return to the (supposed) horror of normal keyboards.
All those TREG users will have their TB's go to digital heaven (or hell, depending on your point of view) and they'll have tasted freedom, tasted love, and then lost it forever.
So, continue to bait and attack DBK if you must, but he's just a proxy for the true target for your ire, which is MK.
MK is the true big kahuna, unless of course we have been played by MK adopting two personas just for fun and to troll us all - it may well be that DBK is MK, but I doubt it, even MK must value his time, although who knows.
Anyway, MK's writing style is VASTLY different to that of DBK, so at the risk of sounding like some Britney Spears defender, it's probably time to leave DBK alone.
MK is the true source of the WT delays, and DBK is just a pawn in the game, as most of us are.
Karma will hopefully checkmate MK if he continues on the path he's been on for 4+ years, and without us a: individuals having any true power in the finalisation of the TB process, we can only hope that MK, despite his weird ways, finds a way to achieve his goal(s), so it turns out that instead of playing checkers, MK really was playing 3D Chess the entire time.
All we have is hope left. HOPE - Hold On, Pain Ends as the advertising signs say in the city I live in, for those suffering with pain. I haven’t looked at those posters too closely but that’s what they say and how the acronym is explained.
HOTC - Hold On, Textblades Come is the last hope we have left, unless those suggestions of complaints to the FTC and lawsuits mentioned in much earlier comments have any reality behind them.
In the meantime, DBK will be DBK, and clearly, nothing and no-one will ever change him, so all we can do is nothing. Twas ever thus. MK, I hope you are doing something real, and not just screwing with us all, which would be extremely cruel and something, despite the really cruel things MK has already demonstrably done, I sincerely hope isn't true.
Who has the money? Certainly not DBK, or at least, I highly doubt it. He has, supposedly, two pre-release TB's, which is two more than you or I have. MK has the money, let's hope that in the end, he spends it on development and delivery.
Good luck MK, and for whatever it's worth, good luck to DBK too, and to me, and you.
Typed on a MB Air 3rd-gen Keyboard, which works just fine, although it sure would have been nice if this was typed on a TextBlade delivered in March 2015 as originally promised, and lied about thereafter so many, many times, to the eternal shame of its creators.
https://www.keychron.com/products/keychron-mechanical-keyboard
Review:
Build - Nice aluminum base. Very sturdy. Not light, not too heavy. Compact for a full 104 key keyboard. Well made. Looks good.
RGB lights - Nice. Perhaps 2 of the static backlight modes are useful. The other modes with flashing LEDs are just distracting eye candy and its annoying to click through all of them to get back to the one you want.
Bluetooth - Works fine. "Jumps" between 3 machines very quickly. Easy to configure.
Key caps - Ok. Flat, not concave. A little wiggly. Not bad. Not great.
Key switches - Fail. For what is supposed to be a 'clicky' mechanical keyboard, these are not good at all. The 'clicky' mechanism is actually just a separate mechanism in the key switch that makes the 'click' sound independently of the switch that actuates and triggers a character from a keypress. The problem is, if you just barely press the keys, they trigger a character before the 'click' ever occurs, and some keys are more sensitive than others. The spacebar is terrible. If you barely rest your thumb on it, it starts triggering spaces. If my hand barely touches the Control key bottom left, then it engages while I am typing, thus producing control-chars that do something unexpected.
Basically they implemented a 'mechanical switch' that is really not mechanical at all, they are just really sensitive keys with a mechanism that 'clicks' when you push the key down far enough. The physical feel of the key presses is not so bad, but the keys are too sensitive and its confusing because they are actuating before the 'click'. It kind of works if you try not to think about it, but its really the opposite of how a mechanical keyboard is supposed to feel and behave, so overall its no good, and I am going to return it.
I have no expectation of the Textblade ever being released, so I guess I will have to try some of those boutique/enthusiast keyboards that are available in different places and see how it goes.
2. The firmware is programming! And the programming can be cleaned up and run faster without necessarily causing problems.