In article <sscklv$495$4@dont-email.me>,
Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> On 19/01/2022 11:13, Bob Latham wrote:
> > Oh I see, you weren't discussing the infection rate, you were
> > criticizing my description of the graphs.
> >
> > That's disappointing.

> When you describe a rapidly dropping infection rate as "almost
> vertically upwards" you are factually incorrect.

> I hesitate to ascribe reasons for this in a public place.

> Andy

Andy, you know full well why - time.

When I wrote that the net was full of graphs from across the world
especially Europe showing vertical or near vertical infection rates.

It was some days afterwards when you made your post and by then as
with all previous waves things had changed, thankfully.

But I'm quite certain you know all of that but still decided to pile
on which doesn't bother me, I expect that of the bonkers left which
is why I don't read most of their posts any longer. They enjoy
attacking anyone who doesn't follow their narrow agendas and
ideologies with any nonsense they can find. But I thought you were
better than that.

Bob.

On 21/01/2022 10:29, Bob Latham wrote:
>
> When I wrote that the net was full of graphs from across the world
> especially Europe showing vertical or near vertical infection rates.

LIE! You wrote that first ...

On 14/01/2022 10:45, Bob Latham wrote:
>
> Have you seen the rate at which people have become infected with
> Omicron in countries including this one? The graphs are vertical
> upwards - extreme transmission.

.... but in fact the peak of our case rates had already passed on
1/1/2022, and by the time you wrote that on the 10th was already falling
rapidly:

https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/cases

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

Oops, typo ...

On 21/01/2022 15:41, Java Jive wrote:
>
> On 21/01/2022 10:29, Bob Latham wrote:
>>
>> When I wrote that the net was full of graphs from across the world
>> especially Europe showing vertical or near vertical infection rates.
>
> LIE!  You wrote that first ...
>
> On 14/01/2022 10:45, Bob Latham wrote:
> >
> > Have you seen the rate at which people have become infected with
> > Omicron in countries including this one? The graphs are vertical
> > upwards - extreme transmission.
>
> .... but in fact the peak of our case rates had already passed on
> 1/1/2022, and by the time you wrote that on the

14th

> was already falling
> rapidly:
>
> https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/cases

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

On 15:41 21 Jan 2022, Java Jive said:

> On 21/01/2022 10:29, Bob Latham wrote:
>>
>> When I wrote that the net was full of graphs from across the world
>> especially Europe showing vertical or near vertical infection rates.
>
> LIE! You wrote that first ...
>
> On 14/01/2022 10:45, Bob Latham wrote:
> >
> > Have you seen the rate at which people have become infected with
> > Omicron in countries including this one? The graphs are vertical
> > upwards - extreme transmission.
>
> ... but in fact the peak of our case rates had already passed on
> 1/1/2022, and by the time you wrote that on the 10th was already
> falling rapidly:
>
> https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/cases
>

As an aside, I wanted to take a look at what someone called "GraphCrimes"
was writing on Twitter about misleading graphs. It seems in the last few
days his account got blocked.

https://mobile.twitter.com/graphcrimes

On 17:47 21 Jan 2022, Pamela said:

> On 15:41 21 Jan 2022, Java Jive said:
>
>> On 21/01/2022 10:29, Bob Latham wrote:
>>>
>>> When I wrote that the net was full of graphs from across the world
>>> especially Europe showing vertical or near vertical infection
>>> rates.
>>
>> LIE! You wrote that first ...
>>
>> On 14/01/2022 10:45, Bob Latham wrote:
>> >
>> > Have you seen the rate at which people have become infected with
>> > Omicron in countries including this one? The graphs are vertical
>> > upwards - extreme transmission.
>>
>> ... but in fact the peak of our case rates had already passed on
>> 1/1/2022, and by the time you wrote that on the 10th was already
>> falling rapidly:
>>
>> https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/cases
>>
>
> As an aside, I wanted to take a look at what someone called
> "GraphCrimes" was writing on Twitter about misleading graphs. It
> seems in the last few days his account got blocked.
>
> https://mobile.twitter.com/graphcrimes

It's okay now. May have been my browser.

On 21/01/2022 18:07, Pamela wrote:
> On 17:47 21 Jan 2022, Pamela said:
>
>> On 15:41 21 Jan 2022, Java Jive said:
>>
>>> On 21/01/2022 10:29, Bob Latham wrote:
>>>>
>>>> When I wrote that the net was full of graphs from across the world
>>>> especially Europe showing vertical or near vertical infection
>>>> rates.
>>>
>>> LIE! You wrote that first ...
>>>
>>> On 14/01/2022 10:45, Bob Latham wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Have you seen the rate at which people have become infected with
>>>> Omicron in countries including this one? The graphs are vertical
>>>> upwards - extreme transmission.
>>>
>>> ... but in fact the peak of our case rates had already passed on
>>> 1/1/2022, and by the time you wrote that on the 10th was already
>>> falling rapidly:
>>>
>>> https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/cases
>>>
>>
>> As an aside, I wanted to take a look at what someone called
>> "GraphCrimes" was writing on Twitter about misleading graphs. It
>> seems in the last few days his account got blocked.
>>
>> https://mobile.twitter.com/graphcrimes
>
> It's okay now. May have been my browser.
>
I think it is the service running slow.

When I clicked on your link I got a screen with just the twitter icon in
the middle for ages, then the rest of the screen contents very slowly
filled in.

I have to admit that when I could read the feed it looked like a waste
of time.

Jim

In article <59ae37bbe5bob@sick-of-spam.invalid>, Bob Latham
<bob@sick-of-spam.invalid> wrote:
> I expect that of the bonkers left which is why I don't read most of
> their posts any longer. They enjoy attacking anyone who doesn't follow
> their narrow agendas and ideologies with any nonsense they can find. But
> I thought you were better than that.

Which tells others more about you than it does about the people in your
fantasy view.

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/intro/electron.htm
biog http://jcgl.orpheusweb.co.uk/history/ups_and_downs.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

In article <XnsAE25AE378D25F37B93@144.76.35.252>, Pamela
<pamela.private.mailbox@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I'm not sure. I've suspected that the reason is that the initial
> > 'schedules' pages constructors work nicely for those who come in to
> > the site via the main 'radio' schedules pages. But when 'Sounds' was
> > added for 'podcasts' they built a different constructor.

> I could understand it if there were several entry points (in the Sounds
> app or on the web site) which all routed to the same page. However, the
> BBC site has more than one *destination* page.

When 'Zounds!' first appeared it offerred 'podcast' versions of broadcast
programmes. i.e. extended with some 'promos' for other podcasts also often
tacked on. These had a totally different pid so came from a distinct list.
The gip fetching for them was also slightly different. For some time the
broadcast version pages and pids remained as for pre-Zounds.

However now, if you use gip to fetch via a broadcast programme's pid you
often get the podcast version. This is often useful in terms of content as
you can get more info that fitted into the shedule slot.

Hence my guess that the autobuilder for podcasts was generated quite
distinctly from the broadcast one. Probably simpler initially as it means
the people populating items onto the broadcast arrangement could do as that
had before whilst podcast was being developed and experimented with.
Avoided a snafu with the podcast system autobuilder fouling up the
established broadcast approach.

After that maybe someone tacked a common interface to both but didn't
bother to go to the effort of conflating two different autobuilders.

Guessing this from have experimented with the autobuild approach in the
past. Handy for when you then have a continual flow of added items. But
once set can be awkward to make radical changes..

An alternative reason I can't comment on is that the interface for Zounds
may look/work better on 'mobile devices' with tiddly screens and no mouse.
I don't use such devices, so someone who does would need to say.

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/intro/electron.htm
biog http://jcgl.orpheusweb.co.uk/history/ups_and_downs.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

On 22/01/2022 11:42, Martin wrote:
>
> If you can find the BBC blog of the people who produce BBC software, it is
> really obvious why nothing works properly.

Microsoft had a similar problem. They had two teams working on the
operating system and one was a lot better than the other, and they took
turn and turn about on the releases.

So we got:
Win 98 Stable, Updated to Win 98SE, also good
Win ME Not as good
Win XP A good one, merging home (ME) and business (NT) streams
Win Vista A bit of a dog
Win 7 Another good one
Win 8 Not popular; 8.1 was very quick to follow replacing the GUI
Win 10 Much better than Win 8

Jim

On Sat, 22 Jan 2022 12:38:00 +0000
Indy Jess John <bathwatchdog@OMITTHISgooglemail.com> wrote:

> Microsoft had a similar problem. They had two teams working on the
> operating system and one was a lot better than the other, and they
> took turn and turn about on the releases.
>
> So we got:
> Win 98 Stable, Updated to Win 98SE, also good
> Win ME Not as good

Wholeheartedly agreed. I had a Dell desktop with that, the PC was slow
anyway, and Win ME was the last thing it needed.

> Win XP A good one, merging home (ME) and business (NT) streams
> Win Vista A bit of a dog
> Win 7 Another good one
> Win 8 Not popular; 8.1 was very quick to follow replacing the GUI
> Win 10 Much better than Win 8
>
> Jim

--
Davey.

On 22/01/2022 12:38, Indy Jess John wrote:
> On 22/01/2022 11:42, Martin wrote:
>>
>> If you can find the BBC blog of the people who produce BBC software,
>> it is
>> really obvious why nothing works properly.
>
> Microsoft had a similar problem.  They had two teams working on the
> operating system and one was a lot better than the other, and they took
> turn and turn about on the releases.
>
> So we got:
> Win 98  Stable, Updated to Win 98SE, also good
> Win ME  Not as good

You've expounded this theory before, I think, but the problem is that
you've left out 2k, which goes here. For my money, it's the best
version of them all, far superior to anything before or since, and
certainly far superior to XP.

> Win XP  A good one, merging home (ME) and business (NT) streams
> Win Vista  A bit of a dog
> Win 7  Another good one
> Win 8  Not popular; 8.1 was very quick to follow replacing the GUI
> Win 10 Much better than Win 8

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

In article <ssf4cv$m80$1@dont-email.me>, Indy Jess John
<bathwatchdog@OMITTHISgooglemail.com> wrote:
> >> https://mobile.twitter.com/graphcrimes
> >
> > It's okay now. May have been my browser.
> >
> I think it is the service running slow.

It also refuses access if you have scripting disabled.

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/intro/electron.htm
biog http://jcgl.orpheusweb.co.uk/history/ups_and_downs.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

On 22/01/2022 13:21, Java Jive wrote:
> On 22/01/2022 12:38, Indy Jess John wrote:
>> On 22/01/2022 11:42, Martin wrote:
>>>
>>> If you can find the BBC blog of the people who produce BBC software,
>>> it is
>>> really obvious why nothing works properly.
>>
>> Microsoft had a similar problem. They had two teams working on the
>> operating system and one was a lot better than the other, and they took
>> turn and turn about on the releases.
>>
>> So we got:
>> Win 98 Stable, Updated to Win 98SE, also good
>> Win ME Not as good
>
> You've expounded this theory before, I think, but the problem is that
> you've left out 2k, which goes here. For my money, it's the best
> version of them all, far superior to anything before or since, and
> certainly far superior to XP.
>
>> Win XP A good one, merging home (ME) and business (NT) streams
>> Win Vista A bit of a dog
>> Win 7 Another good one
>> Win 8 Not popular; 8.1 was very quick to follow replacing the GUI
>> Win 10 Much better than Win 8
>
It wasn't just a theory, this was a conversation with an ex-Microsoft
employee over a lunchtime pint.

2K was in the "Business" stream though it was used by some for home
computing. The upgrade path was to XP Professional, not the Home edition
that was being sold pre-loaded on new PCs. I certainly don't remember 2K
being offered to anybody seeking to buy a home computer, and I was only
looking at the "PC World" style of MS Operating systems. XP was supposed
to be the replacement for 2K for anybody looking for an upgrade, though
I don't think it was good enough for business critical computing until
SP3 was added to the 64-bit Professional version of XP.

Jim

Martin <me@address.invalid> wrote:
> On Sat, 22 Jan 2022 12:38:00 +0000, Indy Jess John
> <bathwatchdog@OMITTHISgooglemail.com> wrote:
>
>> On 22/01/2022 11:42, Martin wrote:
>>>
>>> If you can find the BBC blog of the people who produce BBC software, it is
>>> really obvious why nothing works properly.
>>
>> Microsoft had a similar problem. They had two teams working on the
>> operating system and one was a lot better than the other, and they took
>> turn and turn about on the releases.
>>
>> So we got:
>> Win 98 Stable, Updated to Win 98SE, also good
>> Win ME Not as good
>> Win XP A good one, merging home (ME) and business (NT) streams
>> Win Vista A bit of a dog
>> Win 7 Another good one
>> Win 8 Not popular; 8.1 was very quick to follow replacing the GUI
>> Win 10 Much better than Win 8
>
> At some point the former DEC team joined Microsoft. Win7 ???

Windows NT. Dave Cutler was lead designer for RSX-11M and VMS at DEC. He
and others from that team moved to Microsoft and designed Windows NT.