After my experience with the failing hard-drive a few weeks back, I
decided to (gradually) check the hard-drives of my other devices. In particular, I was interested in seeing the results of one particular
laptop, which I long suspected was having hard-drive issues, but -
since it was so old and never used - I never got around to doing
anything about it.

So, that hard-drive I replaced the other day? It had several dozen bad
sectors. The laptop? 13,946. Yipes!

The computer, amazingly, ran. In fact, other than the annoying
stuttering and micro-freezes (the usual indicator of hard-drive
issues), you'd hardly know there was a problem. No reports about
corrupt files or obvious loss of data. With that many errors, I'd
expect the machine to be crashing all the time.

Fortunately, I had another 2.5" HDD so I swapped that in, but
honestly, I was tempted to keep things as they were. It felt like
tempting fate, and besides, that amount of failure was impressive all
in and of itself. (Also, it's not like I really use that laptop).



Also, that hard-drive I replaced on my PC the other day? Replaced that
again. Not that there was anything wrong with the replacement, at
least not technically. But I decided that - rather than slap in an
older drive (but fully functional) drive I had lying around, I'd give
it a bit of upgrade... because why not. Besides, the older drive used
SMR, and I wanted PMR, for those faster writes (not that I needed
faster writes, but...)

The copy process (and defrag) went faster this time since - rather
than push it through USB - I yanked both and used direct SATA-to-SATA
transfer. It did mean my main PC was offline for a few hours but the
process didn't take days and, anyway, I had another computer to work
on. People laugh at me for my stupidly large number of computers, but
this is why, people! I have backups for my backups! ;-)



Also, I'm at it again with big monitors. I found a 55" screen and
hauled its ass home. I haven't decided if I'm going to keep it though;
it has a pleasantly large screen (and unpleasantly large bevels) but
it doesn't have the crispest image. Maybe I'll use it in the living
room; its deficiencies aren't as obvious from six feet away.

I dunno, though. I keep finding big screens, but none of them ever
satisfy. Maybe I'll eventually have to take the plunge and actually
<gulp> BUY something?

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Mr. Hurgenson:

If you continue to dumpster dive for pc items,
the po po (police) might mistake you for a bum,
and put you in the county jail. There, a strong
chance awaits that you might be buttfucked against
your will.

Knowing that you are a heterosexual man, this would be
very, very damaging to you. Please, Spalls, BUY your
computer stuff and quit the dumpsters!

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 16/08/2022 21:35, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:

Also, I'm at it again with big monitors. I found a 55" screen and
hauled its ass home. I haven't decided if I'm going to keep it though;
it has a pleasantly large screen (and unpleasantly large bevels) but
it doesn't have the crispest image. Maybe I'll use it in the living
room; its deficiencies aren't as obvious from six feet away.

I dunno, though. I keep finding big screens, but none of them ever
satisfy. Maybe I'll eventually have to take the plunge and actually
<gulp> BUY something?

Personally I'd take the plunge and just buy a new one as you can get a perfectly decent one for not a lot of money.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Wed, 17 Aug 2022 08:34:54 +0100, JAB <noway@nochance.com> wrote:

I dunno, though. I keep finding big screens, but none of them ever
satisfy. Maybe I'll eventually have to take the plunge and actually
<gulp> BUY something?

Personally I'd take the plunge and just buy a new one as you can get a >perfectly decent one for not a lot of money.

Oh, I suppose I will eventually... but I don't really /need/ that good
a monitor (getting old and fading eyesight finally has some
advantages; why bother with a 4K UHD when I can can't even make out
the pixels at regular HD?) and since I keep finding stuff for free, it
makes it harder for me to justify the expense.

Side note: the new TV was only 52", not 55" (I made an error with the
unit conversion because maths are hard ;-). Still plenty big and now
that it is hooked up to the PC, it's image isn't so bad.

And there's something obscenely joyful about playing an old DOS game
in a window that's equal in size to 4 DOS-era monitors.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 8/17/2022 8:46 AM, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:

On Wed, 17 Aug 2022 08:34:54 +0100, JAB <noway@nochance.com> wrote:

I dunno, though. I keep finding big screens, but none of them ever
satisfy. Maybe I'll eventually have to take the plunge and actually
<gulp> BUY something?

Personally I'd take the plunge and just buy a new one as you can get a
perfectly decent one for not a lot of money.

Oh, I suppose I will eventually... but I don't really /need/ that good
a monitor (getting old and fading eyesight finally has some
advantages; why bother with a 4K UHD when I can can't even make out
the pixels at regular HD?) and since I keep finding stuff for free, it
makes it harder for me to justify the expense.

Side note: the new TV was only 52", not 55" (I made an error with the
unit conversion because maths are hard ;-). Still plenty big and now
that it is hooked up to the PC, it's image isn't so bad.

And there's something obscenely joyful about playing an old DOS game
in a window that's equal in size to 4 DOS-era monitors.

Only 4? You need to find a better class of dumpsters to dive! :P


--
I've done good in this world. Now I'm tired and just want to be a cranky
dirty old man.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Wed, 17 Aug 2022 11:46:43 -0400, Spalls Hurgenson <spallshurgenson@gmail.com> wrote:

On Wed, 17 Aug 2022 08:34:54 +0100, JAB <noway@nochance.com> wrote:

I dunno, though. I keep finding big screens, but none of them ever
satisfy. Maybe I'll eventually have to take the plunge and actually
<gulp> BUY something?

Personally I'd take the plunge and just buy a new one as you can get a >>perfectly decent one for not a lot of money.

Oh, I suppose I will eventually... but I don't really /need/ that good
a monitor (getting old and fading eyesight finally has some
advantages; why bother with a 4K UHD when I can can't even make out
the pixels at regular HD?) and since I keep finding stuff for free, it
makes it harder for me to justify the expense.

Side note: the new TV was only 52", not 55" (I made an error with the
unit conversion because maths are hard ;-). Still plenty big and now
that it is hooked up to the PC, it's image isn't so bad.

And there's something obscenely joyful about playing an old DOS game
in a window that's equal in size to 4 DOS-era monitors.

Viewing distance matters greatly once you go up in TV size. For a 52"
screen, the ideal distance is probably in the 7-10 foot range. Any
closer than their designed view distance range and most big screens
look like ass.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Wed, 17 Aug 2022 13:34:36 -0700, Dimensional Traveler
<dtravel@sonic.net> wrote:

On 8/17/2022 8:46 AM, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:

And there's something obscenely joyful about playing an old DOS game
in a window that's equal in size to 4 DOS-era monitors.

Only 4? You need to find a better class of dumpsters to dive! :P

That sounds like a set-up for an advertisment:

"Why settle for conventional trash when you can get high-quality
rubbish from a high-quality bin!

"uSkips... for the /discerning/ 'diver!"

(although in fact, none of these TVs were in a skip but merely
curbside discards. I'm too squeamish to be proper skip-skimmer.
There's GARBAGE in those things. ;-)

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 8/17/2022 5:22 PM, Rin Stowleigh wrote:

On Wed, 17 Aug 2022 11:46:43 -0400, Spalls Hurgenson <spallshurgenson@gmail.com> wrote:

On Wed, 17 Aug 2022 08:34:54 +0100, JAB <noway@nochance.com> wrote:

I dunno, though. I keep finding big screens, but none of them ever
satisfy. Maybe I'll eventually have to take the plunge and actually
<gulp> BUY something?

Personally I'd take the plunge and just buy a new one as you can get a
perfectly decent one for not a lot of money.

Oh, I suppose I will eventually... but I don't really /need/ that good
a monitor (getting old and fading eyesight finally has some
advantages; why bother with a 4K UHD when I can can't even make out
the pixels at regular HD?) and since I keep finding stuff for free, it
makes it harder for me to justify the expense.

Side note: the new TV was only 52", not 55" (I made an error with the
unit conversion because maths are hard ;-). Still plenty big and now
that it is hooked up to the PC, it's image isn't so bad.

And there's something obscenely joyful about playing an old DOS game
in a window that's equal in size to 4 DOS-era monitors.

Viewing distance matters greatly once you go up in TV size. For a 52" screen, the ideal distance is probably in the 7-10 foot range. Any
closer than their designed view distance range and most big screens
look like ass.

That could be good or bad, depending on who's ass it looks like. :P
(Sorry, couldn't resist.)

--
I've done good in this world. Now I'm tired and just want to be a cranky
dirty old man.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 17/08/2022 16:46, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:

On Wed, 17 Aug 2022 08:34:54 +0100, JAB <noway@nochance.com> wrote:

I dunno, though. I keep finding big screens, but none of them ever
satisfy. Maybe I'll eventually have to take the plunge and actually
<gulp> BUY something?

Personally I'd take the plunge and just buy a new one as you can get a
perfectly decent one for not a lot of money.

Oh, I suppose I will eventually... but I don't really /need/ that good
a monitor (getting old and fading eyesight finally has some
advantages; why bother with a 4K UHD when I can can't even make out
the pixels at regular HD?) and since I keep finding stuff for free, it
makes it harder for me to justify the expense.

Side note: the new TV was only 52", not 55" (I made an error with the
unit conversion because maths are hard ;-). Still plenty big and now
that it is hooked up to the PC, it's image isn't so bad.

And there's something obscenely joyful about playing an old DOS game
in a window that's equal in size to 4 DOS-era monitors.

As long as you're happy with the monitor you have then yeh, why buy a
new one. The novelty of increased eye candy wears off pretty quickly I
find but the problem is if you go backwards then you do notice it.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Wed, 17 Aug 2022 20:11:05 -0700, Dimensional Traveler
<dtravel@sonic.net> wrote:

On 8/17/2022 5:22 PM, Rin Stowleigh wrote:

On Wed, 17 Aug 2022 11:46:43 -0400, Spalls Hurgenson
<spallshurgenson@gmail.com> wrote:

On Wed, 17 Aug 2022 08:34:54 +0100, JAB <noway@nochance.com> wrote:

I dunno, though. I keep finding big screens, but none of them ever
satisfy. Maybe I'll eventually have to take the plunge and actually
<gulp> BUY something?

Personally I'd take the plunge and just buy a new one as you can get a >>>> perfectly decent one for not a lot of money.

Oh, I suppose I will eventually... but I don't really /need/ that good
a monitor (getting old and fading eyesight finally has some
advantages; why bother with a 4K UHD when I can can't even make out
the pixels at regular HD?) and since I keep finding stuff for free, it
makes it harder for me to justify the expense.

Side note: the new TV was only 52", not 55" (I made an error with the
unit conversion because maths are hard ;-). Still plenty big and now
that it is hooked up to the PC, it's image isn't so bad.

And there's something obscenely joyful about playing an old DOS game
in a window that's equal in size to 4 DOS-era monitors.

Viewing distance matters greatly once you go up in TV size. For a 52"
screen, the ideal distance is probably in the 7-10 foot range. Any
closer than their designed view distance range and most big screens
look like ass.

That could be good or bad, depending on who's ass it looks like. :P
(Sorry, couldn't resist.)

Cheeky!

:)

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Tue, 16 Aug 2022 16:35:04 -0400, Spalls Hurgenson <spallshurgenson@gmail.com> wrote:

After my experience with the failing hard-drive a few weeks back, I
decided to (gradually) check the hard-drives of my other devices. In >particular, I was interested in seeing the results of one particular
laptop, which I long suspected was having hard-drive issues, but -
since it was so old and never used - I never got around to doing
anything about it.

So, that hard-drive I replaced the other day? It had several dozen bad >sectors. The laptop? 13,946. Yipes!

Sounds like a wicked case of Janet Jackson Syndrome:

https://www.zdnet.com/article/dont-let-janet-jacksons-rhythm-nation-crash-your-old-laptop

:)

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 8/18/2022 4:51 PM, Rin Stowleigh wrote:

On Tue, 16 Aug 2022 16:35:04 -0400, Spalls Hurgenson <spallshurgenson@gmail.com> wrote:

After my experience with the failing hard-drive a few weeks back, I
decided to (gradually) check the hard-drives of my other devices. In
particular, I was interested in seeing the results of one particular
laptop, which I long suspected was having hard-drive issues, but -
since it was so old and never used - I never got around to doing
anything about it.

So, that hard-drive I replaced the other day? It had several dozen bad
sectors. The laptop? 13,946. Yipes!

Sounds like a wicked case of Janet Jackson Syndrome:

https://www.zdnet.com/article/dont-let-janet-jacksons-rhythm-nation-crash-your-old-laptop

More precise than an EMP.


--
I've done good in this world. Now I'm tired and just want to be a cranky
dirty old man.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)