I’m having to do a personal computer upgrade. My Windows 7 RC1 (release candidate 1 for you non-geeks) that I installed last year is about to expire, and I have to update my system with the full version tonight.
Thus I’ll be offline and moderation may be slow or non-existent for awhile. Hopefully the WUWT moderation team can pick up the slack. Thanks for your patronage and patience – Anthony
UPDATE: I’m up and running again, pretty painless actually, I had to re-install a couple of applications, and I finally dumped MS-Office for the OpenOffice.org suite. No looking back now. See my desktop below:
For those who still live with the hassles of Windows Vista, do yourself a favor and buy Windows 7.
… and such a polite young man too! 😉
Finally, something that I am qualified to comment on.
Good luck with the Upgrade. As one who is trying to be agnostic when it comes to Operating Systems, I actually enjoy Windows 7.
When I upgraded our computer from Vista home 32 to Windows 7 64 bit, I had visions of spending a whole Saturday upgrading. I told my wife I was going to get my geek on. I was salivating at just the thought.
Turns out it was something like 7 next buttons three okays and go mow the lawn.
Have fun!
Did you partition the drive for the eventuality in the first place?
Don’t forget to do it this time…
hope that goes ok
I don’t think you can ‘update’ to the full version, but get the fun of doing a full reinestall.
When I did the RC win7 fun, I kept all my install programs in separate folders with notes and keys and deactivation and activation procedures knowing the win7 full release was not a simple update.
I often miss the ‘old days’ when a program was a program. The program ran from it’s own directory and you simply copied the directory from one place to the other to ‘move’ it.
I dislike the windows registry.
Anyway – have fun! And best wishes on your ‘update’.
Good luck, I imagine that the swear jar will be full of change in the morning.
Good luck, eh? Meanwhile Canada leads Germany 4-1 in the 2nd period at the Olympics. If they win they get the Russians tomorrow on real anthro created ice.
‘…Thanks for your patronage and patience – Anthony’
And thanks to you (and the mods) for your pertinence and persistence.
Technically, its just called the RC version. It is true that it was the first one, but there was never a second one. We should try to be as accurate as possible in our climate change blogs.
You need a parrot to record your technical notes: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TRhvUJIwbV0
And now, for the inevitable Mac-fanatic jab: You wouldn’t have these kinds of issues if you had a Mac. I thought you were smarter than to have Windows. Sure, I use a Windows machine at work 8 hours each day. But when I actually want to get something done, I use a Mac at home. Do you depend on some software that only works with Windows? So, get a Mac and run both OS-X AND Windows on the same machine at the same time.
Unfortunately, though, Al Gore is on the Apple board — that’s enough to make me want to destroy Apple.
I was very frustrated and annoyed by Vista. Windows 7 is much better product. Still a bit annoyed at having to pay them for the upgrade, but damn glad I did it.
While the cat’s away, the mice continue to throw each other under buses: http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2010/02/the-guardian-disappoints/
Anthony
You CAN upgrade windows7 RC to regular windows 7. I just did it myself yesterday and it works like a charm.
http://www.howtogeek.com/howto/3075/how-to-upgrade-the-windows-7-rc-to-rtm/
good luck!
google “hackintosh” for how to run OS X on hardware not christened by Jobs or cried on by unicorns.
OS X upgrades haven’t been troublefree ever, check out Apple’s support forums for the same kinds of problems you’ll see on ubuntu’s and everyone’s support forums, including MS.
The RC to RTM upgrade isn’t officially supported, but it’s quite possible and has been successful for many.
Good luck! …and relax, kick the feet up. We’ll be good, scout’s honor
* grabs whiskey from parent’s liquor cabinet and calls friends over
😛
Good luck, Anthony. I know what those upgrade evenings can be like. I don’t envy you.
Windows 7 upgrades; not difficult, but very, very tedious. Best of luck and don’t let the BSOD get your hard drive.
I did that process. Sadly, Windows 7 final is not as fast or crash free as RC was. There are also memory leaks.
The words Windows and geeks can only be used in a small set of sentences. All of these sentences can be typified by the example, “Geeks do not use Windows”. 😛
“Van Grungy (17:34:26) :
Have fun!
Did you partition the drive for the eventuality in the first place?
Don’t forget to do it this time…”
No need to do that beforehand anymore. Use Acronis disk manager to “fix” partition/disk decision errors with ease after the event. I use it all the time with my VM’s (SMS, MOM, SCCM, SCOM, Unicenter, SQL, 2K3, 2K8 etc test servers). I’ve even used Acronis to change the sector size to prove a point to someone that when you have a 4kb memory page to swap out, you’ll need 2 i/o’s when your swap space is formatted with 2kb sectors.
If things go poorly and the parrot gets too bossy, there is the beached whale option: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Vmnq5dBF7Y
Thanks for reminding me why I run Linux. For me a clean reinstall is a 1/2 hour tops, with everything running just as before.
What happened to all that Big Oil money you are supposed to be rolling in? I thought you would have a gazillion computers. What’s this – the whole blog is run off one little pc? Sheesh – I hope you at least have a dual head graphics card, or Al Gore will show you up (he’s got 3 big plasma screens). Better put through a grant application to Big Oil….
😉
Thanks for this website. Thanks for the open discussion, more of you are needed.
I feel your pain. I have to do the same tommorriw
My W7-64bit RC1 expired a while back; so also had to spring for RTM version. Went well; and W7 has been flawless (well, at least after I installed latest MSI Motherboard BIOS update shortly after powering up the new i& quad-core machine; to address known problems with silent system hangs due to power management issues between W7 and earlier BIOS versions).
One little gotcha I stumbled on for a bit:
My W7-64 RC1 was Ultimate; my purchased upgrade was for Pro.
Besides as mentioned above that MS does not officially support upgrade from RC to RTM versions, it also turns MS does not want you to upgrade from an Ultimate RC to Pro. Was able to work around it, and all is well now. But grrr…..
Just curious: what software is available for Mac that’s not on a PC? I always thought Mac was way behind PC.
Please, just get a mac. I’d totally be willing to donate towards that cause.
Dual boot Linux. Ubuntu is fine, but there are lots of others.
Keep up the good work. Hey, how about your audit program for the met stations to be used by the UK Met Office program for quality control of the real met data?
LINUXLINUXLINUX
Anthony — you CAN upgrade but there’s a trick…
email me if you need info.
got to copy the dvd to your drive… then edit an ini file in the sources folder…
OH NO!!! WINDOWS???? Why don’t you “update” to gentoo linux instead.
REPLY: My other machines are Ubuntu and Slackware Linux. I use Windows because certain applications I need don’t exist in Linux or in Mac. -A
DesertYote (19:00:35) :
“The words Windows and geeks can only be used in a small set of sentences. All of these sentences can be typified by the example, “Geeks do not use Windows”. :P”
Sorry, that is “Pretentious MAC users who think they are geeks do not use Windows”… I program in more languages than most diplomats speak, I’ve authored a half dozen software manuals, developed several commercial websites, I programmed my own PC operated ‘fax-back’ service in 1992, my own football video game in 7th grade on an HP-99 (1981), I run a virtual world development company, and I’ve used Windows since 1991.
Methow Ken (19:59:53) :
Might you be able to share that work around? My wife have ultimate and I’m not looking forward to reinstalling all her media stuff again when I put Pro on there.
If I have to, I’ll just do a fresh install, but I’m really hoping to make this simpler.
Here’s what you can do to bypass the check for pre-release upgrade IF YOU REALLY REALLY NEED TO:
1. Copy the whole image to a storage location you wish to run the upgrade from (a bootable flash drive or a directory on any partition on the machine running the pre-release build).
3. Browse to the sources directory.
4. Open the file cversion.ini in a text editor like Notepad.
5. Modify the MinClient build number to a value lower than the down-level build. For example, change to 7000.
6. Save the file in place with the same name.
7. Run setup like you would normally from this modified copy of the image and the version check will be bypassed.
I’d volunteer my living body for research on the freezing effects of global warming before I’d ever consider being a guinea pig for a new Windows operating system again.
Good luck with your upgrade. Hope it’s not worse than you thought.
I tried the beta edition on a partition and went back to XP. My kids had Vista. I was impressed enough that when it came out I spent a couple bucks and now only run Windows 7 (5 PC’s), even on my EEE with an upgraded 32 GB SSD.
I actually thought about an apple but I can’t give up my DOS box 😉 … run ‘cmd’ return and its there … comforting.
Apparrently the problem of installing a version of Windows 7 diiferent to Ultimate can be solved also.
see:
http://tech.icrontic.com/articles/upgrade-the-windows-7-rc-to-retail/
He doesn’t want to sit around p*ss*n around trying to get various pieces of hardware to work, which were working perfectly well already?
Plus — software. Glorious choice of dozens of different types of software all designed to accomplish the same thing, in a competitive market, giving one the option to choose the best of the best.
I’ve used both and I always thought so too — before and after using both.
Oh, there’s software for Mac. But there’s inevitably more software for Windows giving one a higher likelihood of finding software that does the task as one wants it done.
With the software as a service model with browser-based delivery, this will be arguably less so in the future… assuming one isn’t using the awful Safari browser.
Macs suck… but man, they sure are pretty, aren’t they?
I prefer Kubuntu Linux due to the KDE desktop environment. Linux – the home for FOSS (Free and Open Source Software).
Good luck with your upgrading, but try Linux from a Live CD.
Anthony –
seriously, if you are running this site on only one machine, get a Pay Pal tip jar going. I am sure many of us would be happy to contribute
I had win7 premium RC then I was faced with Big price to get real Win7 Premium.. I went for PCLinusOS much better the Win7 ! and safer!
windows is shutting
down it is now safe
to turn off your computer
Even world changing blog owners make mistakes…
The only reason that people like windows 7 is because it looks and feels more like a mac than ever before. Just bite the bullet and get a macbook and get the whole deal. You get the power of unix, the beauty of a mac and no more crashes. Just run your windows in a vmware window if you really need to. After a while you will not feel the need to go back.
Windows is great for the younger generation but for serious users, you should be on unix. Any flavour will do from linux through to macs. Anyone that misses the command.com needs to see what you can do in the terminal window on macs.
Ex windows developer.
I’ve been a Linux guy since 2000. My first OS was Red Hat 7.1 (before they started doing the Fedora thing). I love Linux, but I am not a “LInux Snob”. I have been using Win 7 on my audio processing machine, and it is a fine OS. I’ve not done the RC to regular upgrade, but have heard it is easy. Good Luck Anthony…. And crap, I just realized I still need to get the latest pic of the Yosemite station over to Surfacestations.org. Will do that tomorrow.
OS evangelists… second against the wall come the revolution.
Why not buy a Fedora or Kubuntu bundle on a CD, put in disk reader and reboot? Much easier, and so much more free high quality applications on the web for it …
Just a suggestion.
its a sign of global warming the need to update your windows LOL..
“Windows 7 RC1”
Awkward choice for someone championing transparency and open practices 🙂 Good luck with the new install.
Seattle will one day be wiped out by another giant tsunami. Start praying.
AH HA! Proof that you’re funded by wealthy industrialists like the Gates Foundation! AND SINCE THEY BUY GAS FOR THEIR CARS AND PLANES YOU ARE NOW LINKED TO BIG OIL!
God luck and Thanks for All the Fish – I’ll light a candle for you
Don’t believe the official microsoft line about not being able to go from RC1 to the full release. I did it and it works fine – as long as you have matching versions (ie RC1 utlimate to retail Ultimate).
You can easily google the upgrade instructions – you just have to update a text file to tell it which version to pretend it is.
ah, Win7 is fun. It’s what Vista was supposed to be, but they rushed Vista out too soon.
Always use the right tool for the job. My webservers are Linux, of course, and don’t require mega-hardware to run circles around the alternatives. My work computer is Win7 and XP dual boot, since I develop software for a large installed base of Win2K machines and some of our legacy software just doesn’t work on Win7. My home PC is Vista on the Quadcore, where it’s fast and solid. As I understand it, Vista isn’t fast anywhere but on the Quadcore.
My laptops are both XP, and I have zero issues with them. The work laptops are all new, and have Win7 on them. No complaints, no issues.
Next reinstall on my home PC is to Win7, there are exactly 3 MAJOR annoyances in Vista that the SPs never addressed, but they’re not an issue in Win7.
Macs are computers for people who don’t understand computers. Funny, the average Mac fan doesn’t realize that if they spent the same on a PC that they did for their Mac, they’d also have a fast, stable, decent computer. Oh well. I have avoided Apple for years simply because of their loud politics, but there are other great reasons to avoid them.
(was that geeky enough?)
John Mason (17:41:16) :
“I often miss the ‘old days’ when a program was a program. The program ran from it’s own directory and you simply copied the directory from one place to the other to ‘move’ it.”
“I dislike the windows registry.”
Thats .NET you talk about. Its already here. lots of programs do it that way. Registry isnt popular anymore, was just another blind alley to confusion.
I upgraded my RC two days ago. It was pretty painless. If you have iTunes, don’t forget to deauthorise your computer first ;).
Anthony
Are you boasting or complaining?
Lee
You know, you can modify 1 file on the RTM / Retail CD and do an in-place upgrade of the RC- should take about 20 minutes.
http://www.howtogeek.com/howto/3075/how-to-upgrade-the-windows-7-rc-to-rtm/
Len wrote “I actually thought about an apple but I can’t give up my DOS box 😉 … run ‘cmd’ return and its there … comforting.”
I develop software, and I totally agree, except that there is a product called 4NT which is a better CMD box. GUI interfaces are too fiddly and change from version to version. Things change much more slowly at the command level, because presumably the Microsoft guys don’t think it is sexy enough. I’d love to go to Linux, but most of my work is Windows based.
Just curious: what software is available for Mac that’s not on a PC? I always thought Mac was way behind PC.
By John Hooper on February 23
Should be the other way around, and why macs are behind.
Mapinfo, Manifold GIS, all goldensoftware, Surfer, Grapher etc, All the mining induatry software packages.
I use M$ for the same reason I use English.
A Mac man since 1984……
For me there is only one problem and Chad Woodburn said it.
“Unfortunately, though, Al Gore is on the Apple board — that’s enough to make me want to destroy Apple.”
When Gore is pushed off the Apple Board, that is when I too will stop hating Apple for appointing Gore in the first place. Jobs needs a smack! Gore must go!
Good luck with Windows 7
MrPete (21:54:40) :
What software do you use for image copy? please.
Thanks for the tip Patrick
Dear Anthony,
Take care of yourself. There is a big battle ahead and your resources are no match for those of the federal government.
E.g., this brand new, slick, and persuasive propaganda sheet:
“New NASA Web Page Sheds Light on Science of Warming World” at:
http://www.jpl. nasa.gov/ news/news. cfm?release= 2010-062&cid=release_ 2010-062
Your opponents have enormous resources to make certain that you do not expose the decades of filth and deception at the base of the Climategate iceberg: Modern science is simply a tool of propaganda.
Hang in there, Anthony. I know that it is not to your liking, but we will hang separately or hang together.
Best wishes on the journey,
Oliver K. Manuel
Interesting, looks like the cryosphere people don’t want to put 2008 or 2009 ice graphs here hahahah
http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/seasonal.extent.1900-2007.jpg
Some sites that go well hand-in-hand with an O/S upgrade:
pack.google.com – all the basic utilities – free
ninite.com — even better — check the boxes on all kinds of good utilities and you get the entire set installed in one shot — no registering/configuring just splat onto your pc.
I agree with those recommending Linux. I have moved to Ubuntu on both my PC and laptop and haven’t looked back. I have also experienced less hassles than windows based machines and didn’t have to overpay for an apple alternative.
BTW, this is an excellent site.
Macs are for people who don’t understand computers?
When a room full of some of the country’s best lawyers are all using Macs, I think that’s actually a compliment to the Mac platform.
But so long as you’re not confusing intelligence with how people choose to spend their time, then I guess that’s OK.
Linux.
Try doing any normal non-development work on it and see how far you get.
Windows 7 is once of the most stable, user friendly and ‘best’ operationg systems i’ve ever used, going back to dos 3.1/5 and solaris 10 which i use at work.
I’ve also played with Macs, and i have to support some applications that run on Macs.
New OSX = nightmare, numerous ‘problems’, just google OSX & youtube for starters….
Windows 7 ‘just works’ unfortunately for apple.
Not had a single crash yet, an application fail or something ‘not work’ and thank GOD MS have got rid off vistas AWFUL UAC controls.
Back to work now, i have some uber complicated german SAP systems to look after than run off oracle databases….
Gotta ad my pro Mac comment. Went all Mac in the family last year–best executive decision my wife has ever let me make. No more crashes, no more waiting, no more viruses, popups, adware, spyware worries, panic calls from home, Geek Squad visits, etc. Complete boot in 8 seconds. It has been worth the few extra $.
Hah, Anthony. . . me too, over last weekend. I’m rather bitter about the fact that the RC was only Ultimate, and therefore to put the final of Professional on you are forced to do a clean install rather than an upgrade, with all the PITA that implies of reinstalling all your other software.
OS flame war on!
Will Windows 7 withstand the test of time and the Russian mafia? That’s the big question for the Windows junkies, imho. I’ve yet to see a version of Windows (patched or unpatched) that can withstand basic Internet surfing by an average user.
Vista was not rushed to market, btw. It was smothered to death by Microsoft.
Great time to switch to ubuntu…
Al Gore uses a Mac.
’nuff said.
Macs are not perfect by any stretch. They’re “less annoying” in my experience.
If Windows 7 is also less annoying then praise the lord. About bloody time.
It really all depends on the things you do, the things you are interested in, the things that you like and the things you couldn’t care less about. Some people actively dislike Macs because they disdain the sight of trendy kids in Apple Stores. Some people use Windows because they’re architects and the whole office runs off one CAD package. Some people place a lot of importance on aesthetics, or being able to use unix tools, or both. The point is, it is all about choice.
But computers are a platform and in that sense they’re a bit like getting married. Once you buy the thing, add software, produce data, spend time getting to know it, you’ve basically married the thing. You’re stuck. It becomes a bit self-reinforcing. A bit of a paradigm.
My commodore 64 works just fine.
REPLY: are you using that to post here?
Paul Benkovitz (19:22:29) :
Geez, the last time I upgraded I built a new system, then it was something
like two weeks to get everything going again and copied over. However, I
learned a lot about the new version of MySQL (they changed some of the
authentication and export stuff I needed), get a new version of Python
going, get the Python to MySQL interface going (going from 0.8 to 1.1
release), and Apache, and Vantage Pro weather database and Python code
to talk between that and the database….
Problem is, it’s getting to be about time to do it again. Maybe I’ll
upgrade to Python V3 this time. (Major change to the language.)
len (22:40:25) :
That’s one nice thing about Macs – it’s supported by a competent company
but you can open a Real Unix command shell.
You can kind do the same thing on Windows with Cygwin. (Unix users can’t
use a PC without Cygwin.)
While a nice, simple DOS prompt can be oddly reassuring, I much prefer the
Unix improvement and be able to do some neat stuff with little hassle.
A number of folks in the Greater New Hampshire Linux Users Group have
MacBooks to have one system mostly works out of the box and save their
home/office Linuxes for development work.
[Let me try that without line breaks. Programmers and long lines don’t mix….]
Paul Benkovitz (19:22:29) :
Geez, the last time I upgraded I built a new system, then it was something like two weeks to get everything going again and copied over. However, I learned a lot about the new version of MySQL (they changed some of the authentication and export stuff I needed), get a new version of Python going, get the Python to MySQL interface going (going from 0.8 to 1.1 release), and Apache, and Vantage Pro weather database and Python code to talk between that and the database….
Problem is, it’s getting to be about time to do it again. Maybe I’ll upgrade to Python V3 this time. (Major change to the language.)
len (22:40:25) :
That’s one nice thing about Macs – it’s supported by a competent company but you can open a Real Unix command shell.
You can kind do the same thing on Windows with Cygwin. (Unix users can’t use a PC without Cygwin.)
While a nice, simple DOS prompt can be oddly reassuring, I much prefer the Unix improvement and be able to do some neat stuff with little hassle.
A number of folks in the Greater New Hampshire Linux Users Group have MacBooks to have one system mostly works out of the box and save their home/office Linuxes for development work.
CodeTech, I’d just say that most people in the world don’t understand what they’re buying when they buy computers. Quick rant: an architects’ firm moved to a new CAD system because it had some vague checkbox compatibility with their old PR1MOS mini system–the new system was Windows based and could load the old drawings. But the new system was also a piece of s**t to use. I know as I was forced to use it for a year. Some people preferred to go back to the time-sharing PR1MOS system because the new CAD system was so awful. Simple issues about usability and workflow were just not properly thought out. And the thing wasn’t even widely used in the industry. So instead of facing the compatibility issue once when they left PR1MOS, they faced it every time they collaborated with engineers and quantity surveyors.
But that’s what they bought and they were stuck with it. So what winds me up is when people go shopping with a closed mind. Instead of being willing to rethink the situation freshly and see what’s available, and balance all the needs and disadvantages, people often end up with crap “solutions”. Sometimes Windows is the best possible. Sometimes Linux. Sometimes a Mac. Depends entirely on the individual’s needs, plus what they like.
My imaginary vision of Anthony is obliterated. Here I was imagining a Harry Potter like creature sitting in front of a Mac. While your at it why not simply upgrade your PC to a Mac!
REPLY: My first personal computer was an Apple II, which I developed hardware and software on until they abandoned it and thousand of other developers in 1984 with the Mac. I owned a Mac in the 80’s but never felt comfortable developing on it due to it’s closed minded nature. In the 90’s with Power PC clones I started to develop hardware and software around Power PC’s in the 90’s. Then Steve Jobs slammed the door again cost me thousands in development that I had banked on.
I won’t make the mistake of trusting Apple a third time. – Anthony
Another furfy… which is true?
this one
http://weather.unisys.com/surface/sst_anom.html
or this one?
http://www.osdpd.noaa.gov/data/sst/anomaly/2010/anomnight.2.22.2010.gif
One is so obviously trying to prove a point…LOL What a farce!
george h. (05:42:56) : “Gotta ad my pro Mac comment. Went all Mac in the family last year–best executive decision my wife has ever let me make.”
I agree, George.
OM
As someone who has worked with many OSes over a 25 year career in the IT industry, I am qualified to comment. I must say that Windows 7 is the first OS that Microsoft can be proud of. It actually eliminates many long standing Microsoft issues. But that said, having the knowlege to maintain any OS, I still use Mac OS X myself.
Apple understands something that Microsoft does not. Computers are a holistic integration of hardware and software. The combination of Mac OS X and Apple hardware is simply a better product, and more importantly, has a much lower TCO. I routinely have to spend far more time with Windows. Money my clients would not need to spend if they used Macs. Windows 7 is certainly not worth the outrageous price Microsoft charges. Also of note is that currently I am selling a PowerBook from 2004 for $400. The upgrade fee to a much better laptop is far less than a new Windows laptop becuase Macs hold their value.
Good luck with the upgrade, and all the hassles and expense of Microsoft licensing.
In response to Fergal’s link to the RealClimate article on the Guardian series:
Gavin re-quotes the Guardian’s quote of Kieth Briffa, as follows:
“Confidentially I now need a hard and if required extensive case for rejecting [an unnamed paper] to support Dave Stahle’s and really as soon as you can.”,
and briefly describes how Pearce “misinterpreted” that statement. Gavin then answers the claim, saying that 1) it was taken out of context, 2) the proper context involves an understood (if unstated) “IF you are going to recommend rejection”, and 3) when put in the proper context, this request is one that editors make all the time, and it is perfectly normal and acceptable, and it is not an attempt to garner the kind of review that the editor wants.
I posted the following comment on the RealClimate page containing this article. It’s “awaiting moderation”. What do you want to bet my comment will never see the light of day at RealClimate.
“One question, Gavin. If this request by Briffa is perfectly legitimate, and it’s something that editors do all the time, and it was contingent on an unstated but (somehow) understood “if you are going to recommend rejection”, then why did Briffa precede the request with the word “confidentially”? “Confidentially” usually implies that whatever appears after that word should be kept secret. So why does Briffa want this request kept secret, if it’s really completely on the up-and-up?
Regards,
Trevor”
I did the same thing, with all the drivers and stuff, it is a real pain to do.
Mac’s are becoming something of a status symbol.
If it is able to float your boat, go for it.
There are out of the norm type jobs that you just cannot do with a Mac because the job specific software isn’t written to run on a mac; unless your willing to run purchase a copy of Windows and run Wine, but then isn’t that’s just conceding the point?.
Please help me out someone!!
Whats the scientific arguments to have GISS surface temp measures as reference to global temperatures infavour of NOAA satellite measures that Phd Christy is working with?? I cant find any arguments that explains this.
Surface contra atmosfaric measures seems to be an easy choice.
Windows upgrade? Have two rubber chickens on hand, just in case you need a spare.
Time for a Mac, methinks.
Surely the chickens are for the SCSI gods??
I prefer Linux, but Ubuntu and my graphics card (ATI HD3200) don’t like each other. The scrolling white dots indicate that something isn’t good for the circuitry. I don’t want to fry my computer for ideological reasons.
Further, there is no adequate serious photography software on Ubuntu or any other Linice I know of. Alas. WINE won’t run Lightroom.
If all you do is word process and surf the web, or do non-photographic science, Linux is great. There is a LOT of high-end scientific software free for Linux.
Do I -ever- wish I’d known about upgrading from RC to final without reformatting. ARG!
Macs are great. I had a couple, and I keep entering to win one.
Thanks for all you are doing Anthony, and good luck with the upgrade.
I have converted to OpenOffice too, it does all I need wrt. office things. I like software that runs on any OS!
I would recommend one of the Linux Ubuntu variants for an OS upgrade. I am using Windows XP and Linux Kubuntu with the KDE4 desktop. The plan is to leave Windows behind entirely.
I recently bought a cheap wireless weather station with a USB PC connection to the indoor unit, and managed to write a Linux driver for it. I wiped out XP on an old laptop and installed the lightweight Linux Xubuntu instead. It is now running happily, gathering measurements every 10 minutes. The data are online at http://arnholm.org/ws/
I have some issues with placement of the outdoor unit to get proper daytime temperature readings when the sun is up, but currently it is far too cold and too much snow to do anything about it 🙂 As my readings show, we had -20C this morning…
If you own a Mac where I live, expect a 2 hour drive to the nearest store when the hardware fails(and all computers have hardware failures). Having worked many years as a computer technician, this is my humble opinion:
A PC with windows requires people to think. Do I really think I’m going to get free p0rn win I click that link I received in my email? Is that a real warning that just popped up on my screen, or is a website tying to trick me?
A Mac…click away and know that the OS is so locked down you can’t be hurt.
Why are all the viruses written for Windows? Well, let’s see…Windows has something like 95% of the market. ‘Nuff said.
Well, what do you know – Gavin posted my comment. His reply was:
“Discussions between editors, reviewers and authors are always confidential – you are not supposed to show people drafts you have received as a reviewer, and your reviews are supposed to be for the author’s eyes only – whether you sign your reviews or not. But I have no further information into the context of this remark than anyone else. – gavin”
And MY reply was:
“Ah, so discussions of this kind are “always confidential”.
So why was it necessary for Briffa to CLEARLY STATE something that SHOULD BE OBVIOUS to anyone and everyone who has ever reviewed a journal article?
And why, if Briffa thinks Cook doesn’t already understand so obvious a rule, would Briffa COMPLETELY NEGLECT to mention that his request of a “hard and … extensive case for rejecting” the article was contingent upon Cook actually recommending rejection?
On the one hand, you’re arguing that Briffa was merely sloppy in not being crystal clear about the conditional aspect of his request. But on the other hand, you’re arguing that Briffa felt it necessary to be crystal clear about the confidential nature of his request, even though the confidentiality aspect is UNIVERSALLY known and understood by all reviewers.
No, Gavin, Briffa clearly meant something more sinister than the standard “confidentiality” that applies to conversations of this sort; the context you provided only underscores this fact.
Furthermore, I think the CRU emails prove that Briffa has never been all that concerned about the standard confidentiality of conversations between authors, editors, and reviewers (Dec 17, 2001; Mar 22, 2002; May 27, 2008)
I know what you’re going to say – that you “have no further information into the context of this remark than anyone else”, so you can’t jump to any conclusion about what Briffa actually meant, even though, on the face of it, it’s quite damning. You’re arguing for giving him a pass on it unless we can find ABSOLUTE PROOF that he was attempting to subvert the peer review process. OK, fine. I’ll give him that pass, on one condition. You stop trying to shut down (or slow down) the world’s fossil-fuel-based economy until we have ABSOLUTE PROOF that mankind’s fossil fuel emissions are causing catastrophic global warming (that’s two parts there – we’re causing it AND it will be catastrophic). Deal? The world’s economy, and the billions that will die if we make any serious effort to stop (or even slow) global warming based on YOUR UNPROVEN THEORY of what is causing it are far more important than the reputation of one man.
Regards,
Trevor”
Win 7 is organized better and much cleaner than Vista – but imo, Vista wasn’t all that bad. I’ve been having problems with video card drivers in Win 7 (both 32 and 64 bit) so upgraders should just be aware – I think there is still potential for issues in Win7, even though overall there seems to be some improvement over Vista.
A computer without Microsoft is like a chocolate cake without mustard. — Anon.
Enjoy the mustard. 🙂
REPLY: The OS is only the papyrus of the messenger. It’s what is written on the papyrus that is important, not the brand of papyrus. – Anthony
(quote) Ric Werme (06:23:41) :
Geez, the last time I upgraded I built a new system, then it was something
like two weeks to get everything going again and copied over.(/quote)
30 min was just for a reinstall or a clean point upgrade. Having a separate /home partition is the key. Save your old /etc to /home and use your package manager to make an install script of all your installed programs before you install. Replace /etc then run the script.
A server is a lot harder, but copying /var/lib should get you running soon. Building a new system can be hard because you can only copy a part of /etc.
I simply added a SATA drive to my Dell XPS and installed Windows 7 64-bit on that. I can still boot my old XP instance via BIOS selection at startup. Since it has been working flawlessly and very fast for two months now and I have all my data moved, time to format that XP drive and use it for virtual machines…
Windows 7 rocks
All this computer talk about different OS’s reminds me of an article I read in UNIXWORLD way back in the early 90’s where a question was put out to useres to comment on; “If your Operating System were an airline, what would it be like?”
1) Microsoft Windows (3.1/Workgroups): You arrive at the airport, everything looks good, people are friendy & seems to be going along well but a while after the airplane takes off, without warning, it explodes in midair.
2) Microsoft Windows NT: passengers arrive at the airport, go out to the runway sit in the outline of an airplane & make flying, swooshing sounds.
3) UNIX: passengers arrive at the airport with pieces of the airplane and they sit around & argue about how the plane is supposed to be put together & operate.
4) Apple Mac: You arrive at the airport, everything looks good, people are friendy & seems to be going along well but when you ask for details, you are told you don’t want to know, you don’t need to know so sit down & shut up.
I got a good laugh & thankfully, things have changed…
Jeff
It is my opinion that Windows 7 is the best operating system out there. I’ve used Mac OS X, Red Hat Linux, and Solaris Unix. Unix is my second favorite OS after Windows. But of all the Windows, I think W7 is the absolute best.
Now for the shameless plug. If you want to upgrade without losing anything, I have a blog post about it. I upgraded from Windows 7 RC1 to Windows 7 without a hitch. You need to modify the Windows 7 DVD a little. The instructions for that are here.
http://www.techs-on-call.biz/blog/post.cfm/making-your-windows-7-disc-compatible-with-all-editions
After you have a universal Windows 7 disc, just run the setup program on the disc within Windows (you cannot upgrade if you boot to the disc), choose the upgrade option, and let it do its magic. For yet another shameless plug, if you ever have questions about why Vista/7 annoy you with warnings all the time, read my blog entry about that.
http://www.techs-on-call.biz/blog/post.cfm/making-your-windows-7-disc-compatible-with-all-editions
Thank you for helping me improve my Google ranking!
Update:
Gavin deleted my reply to his reply to my “confidentially” comment. When your own logic backs you into a corner, just delete the evidence. But it’s okay. I think Gavin made a fool oh himself with that lame reply to my first comment. Everyone who has read that email from Briffa KNOWS, whatever else he was trying to accomplish with that email, he wanted to make damn sure no one knew he was doing it.
Trevor
I suppose the Mac vs Windows vs Linux comments are inevitable, but I thought there would be a few more comments about Open Office and your choice to go with it. I took up OO when I got my Mac laptop a few years ago and it’s worked very well for me. I don’t have problems opening students’ papers from almost any format. I haven’t run into too many things I miss from Word or Excel. Glad you’re back up and running!
Damn if Micr$oft didn’t get this one right… bout time ; )~ but, wipe it all out and start fresh ~regards
Wait!, perhaps Climate Gate was originated by “Vista” !!
Another update:
After my second comment, dismantling Gavin’s defense of Briffa, was rejected, I posted another comment which (if Gavin posts it, which he won’t) should settle this once and for all, save another lame excuse from Gavin.
Briffa via Guardian via Gavin: “Confidentially I now need a hard and if required extensive case for rejecting [an unnamed paper] to support Dave Stahle’s and really as soon as you can.”
Trevor: “One question, Gavin. If this request by Briffa is perfectly legitimate, and it’s something that editors do all the time, and it was contingent on an unstated but (somehow) understood “if you are going to recommend rejection”, then why did Briffa precede the request with the word “confidentially”? “Confidentially” usually implies that whatever appears after that word should be kept secret. So why does Briffa want this request kept secret, if it’s really completely on the up-and-up?”
Gavin: “Discussions between editors, reviewers and authors are always confidential – you are not supposed to show people drafts you have received as a reviewer, and your reviews are supposed to be for the author’s eyes only – whether you sign your reviews or not. But I have no further information into the context of this remark than anyone else. – gavin”
Reply from Trevor: Your own statement (directly above) proves that Briffa doesn’t give a rat’s tail about the “rules” of peer review. If “your reviews are supposed to be for the author’s eyes only”, then Briffa, as neither the author nor the reviewer, would have no idea what was in Stahle’s review of the same paper, and thus would not know that a “hard and … extensive case for rejecting [the paper]” from Cook would be in support of Stahle’s review or not. Moreover, he should not have even told Cook the name of another reviewer (at least that’s my understanding of peer review), let alone reveal the main gist of what the other reviewer had to say (that’s YOUR statement about peer review). This email from Briffa violates the very “confidentiality” that you claim he is trying to remind Cook of. Briffa doesn’t care a whit about the confidentiality between author, reviewer, and editor – the only confidentiality he cares about is Cook confiding the fact that Briffa is trying to subvert the peer review process.
Regards,
Trevor
I wonder, has Briffa himself tried to defend that particular statement? If so, can someone tell me what he said, or link me to it?
Regards,
Trevor
mikelorrey (21:50:41) :
Ummm, I think I’ve been developing software a bit longer then you so forgive me if I am not overly impressed. My first real program numerically solved systems of a class of differential equations related to the three body problem. It was written in HP Basic on an HP 200f in 1976. I was 16. The last time I touched a Mac (other then Motorola’s failed mac clones, who’s manufacturing software infrastructure I supported professionally) was in 91. I washed my hands afterwords.
Most of the kids coming out of school with their freshly minted CS degrees only know the MS architectural paradigm, which is absolutely antithetical to the direction software needs to go. They are incapable of understanding that there are better ways to do things. The rot is spreading, just look at the steaming pile of garbage that is Gnome.
A computer geek knows how to properly work with any computer that might come along because they understand the fundamentals intimately. That condition is not satisfied by most of thous who have learned how to develop for windows.
BTW, my main fields of expertise are Instrument Control and Test and Measurement. Which kinda explains my interest in WUWT. MS molestation of both fields is a disaster. “Hold on a minute, my Spectrum Analyzer just Blue Screened.”
Hmmm… Win 3.1, Win95, Win98SE, WIn2K SP2 & SP4, Win Xp SP2 & SP3, + several external USB storage devices on about that many different computers (plus running spares + several dedicated-purpose machines) –
– how do DO you guys live life with just *one* (‘computer’ that is) ????
.
.
Well all of my recent inquiries have come back with the response that going from Vista to 7 is a definite gotta do ASAP, and that XP-7 is also a safe and preferred step to take as well.
Suffice to say that my employer admits to having a server now running Win-7, and that new computers will be thus endowed; but they ahve not let out a general upgrade call yet.
Im running XP-Pro-64, at work, and XP-Pro-32 at home; but will asap be going win-7pro-64 at home, so I can finally use all my 8 gigs of RAM.
My very expensive Optical Design software, runs super well on 8 processors (or even 16) under XP-64, and as of yesterday, the purveyor says they are running two machines on Win-7-64 with 8 processors, and mucho gusto.
But then Windows is inherently the worlds largest computer virus; so you get what you deserve. My guess is the software has completely erased whatever hardware speed gains have been made, since MS DOS-3.2
I used to know what every single file on my computer did; and files that did nothing I needed, soon saw the bottom of the circular file.
Now I have whole gigabyte folders (whatever they are) that don’t seem to do anything I need, but I can’t get rid of them; or the date comes up wrong on the screen.
What I really need is a calculator that crunches numbers; and a punched paper tape would do as output if I can get that output calculated faster.
Keep us posted on the -7 adventure Anthony.
JeffK, I remember all those “if Windows was a…” posts… they were usually painfully accurate.
How about this for a more modern take on the airport:
1. Windows 7: You arrive at the terminal, check your luggage, go through security, board the plane, arrive at your destination, obtain your luggage, and continue on with your day.
2. Windows Vista: Same as above except the flight takes 4 days. You are also asked several dozen times if you really want to take this flight, if you really want to put your carry-on in the overhead, if you really want to use the restroom. etc. Inexplicably, at the end of the flight you are given a list of things you read during the flight. (this is a reference to Vista’s odd insistence of putting folder names in IE history)
3. Windows XP: Save as above except the plane is older, a bit creaky, there is no first class section, food is optional, and you couldn’t bring your newest set of luggage because the “drivers” won’t fit in the cargo hold.
4. Linux: Sleek jet fighter, one pilot, no passenger. 4096 buttons and switches in the cockpit, you must have detailed knowledge of at least 2048 to even start the plane.
5. Mac: Same as 1, except the whole time someone is telling you how much better your flight is than the Windows passengers.
Gee, I just upgraded too. My 11 year old Gateway Windows ME machine just fried its second graphics card in a month so I moved everything to a Toshiba laptop. It has a broken screen, broken speakers, and a missing key on the keyboard. With a USB port replicator, I’ve got everything working on external parts, including an old internal hard drive and optical drive from the Gateway pc using a universal USB adapter. I’ll probably upgrade to Windows 7 in about 7 years on another carcass. As long as I can still read WattsUpWithThat, I’m good.
Per chance, are you an old Mac OS user? You have your garbage can in the lower right corner.
“Stefan (05:07:16) :
Macs are for people who don’t understand computers?
When a room full of some of the country’s best lawyers are all using Macs, I think that’s actually a compliment to the Mac platform.
But so long as you’re not confusing intelligence with how people choose to spend their time, then I guess that’s OK.”
I’m really sure there’s a lawyer joke in there but I’ll let it go for now. 😉
Egad! Life is too short to get all twisted up in an OS kerfuffle. As self-proclaimed IT Consultant for just about 20 years… I have come to a few certain realizations. One is that the computer world world works on a 95/5 rule. 95% of the world works on Windows. 5% works on all other OS’s. And in businesses nearly 100% are Windows. The server rooms may have multiple OS’s, but the people work with Windows. That being said, Windows 7 is brilliant in comparison with Vista. Love it, live it, get over it. Or as Bill Gates famously said… “embrace, and extend”.
PS- And while you’re at it… get one of Anthony’s Data Loggers to check your server room temperatures. Nothing get’s them moving like seeing a nice graph of the room spiking to 97 degrees on the weekends when the building cuts the AC!
Getting rid of Vista = GOOD THING.
Adopting Openoffice.org = GOO THING.
Using Windows 7 = well, it all can’t be good 🙂
Hey there Anthony.
Just wanted to say it’s cool that you run some open source OSs like Slackware, I’m kind of proud of you. I’ve been checking out your links and putting some of the data up on graphs with GNUplot. Have you been using that? Ocatve? OOcalc maybe? I’m interested to know what scientific software you’ve been using…..
I’m just glad to see you have a plethora of good things to work with so you can keep up the good work! 🙂
I know no one much cares about my little adventure over at RealClimate, but I’m going to keep documenting it here, because I can’t trust Gavin to post my comments. He posted and replied to my last comment. His reply was lame:
“In any resubmission there is usually a response to the reviewers and the reviewers then get to see the original reviews (which may have been signed) and the response. The parties to this conversation obviously already knew that Stahle was a reviewer from which I conclude that it is likely that Stahle signed his original review. If you want to imagine some sneaky conspiracy, do it elsewhere, but I’m not particularly interested in playing games based on fact-free speculations. – gavin”
I’m prepared to accept the notion that Gavin just misstated his original “authors eyes only” reply (or didn’t state it precisely enough), and his revised statement on the subject, above, is actually closer to the truth. But I would very much like to pin Gavin down on this, once and for all, which is the point of the first paragraph of my reply, below. However, I don’t think it really matters, as explained in the remainder of my reply to Gavin. A review of an original submission would be irrelevant the moment the paper was re-submitted, and thus no amount of support for the original review would do any good. Briffa’s reference to Stahle’s bad review makes sense only if it is Stahle’s review of the REsubmitted paper. Even by Gavin’s revised “author’s eyes only” rule, it is a strict no-no to tell one reviewer of a re-submitted paper what another reviewer said about the same re-submitted paper. Gavin’s grasping at straws here, and I’m almost certain my most recent comment will never be posted on RealClimate. But you can read it here:
“But the reviews “are supposed to be for the author’s eyes only”. Your words, Gavin, not mine. Stahle’s review was supposed to be FOR THE AUTHOR’S EYES ONLY. Not Briffa’s and not Cook’s. Now that I’ve caught you in a contradiction, you seem to be trying to modify your “author’s eyes only” statement to apply to only the period before the re-submission. So let’s be clear, Gavin, for once, so I can pin you down. Is there or is there not an “author’s eyes only” rule for reviews, does it exclude the editor, and when does it cease to apply? Please state this as clearly as possible so you can’t weasel your way out of it next time.
“Actually, it really doesn’t matter. Any review by Stahle of the ORIGINAL submission would have been irrelevant after re-submission. Even if the resubmission did not involve changes to the paper itself, but only a separate written response to Stahle’s review, Stahle’s original review would be invalid until such time as Stahle responded to the author’s response. Therefore, Briffa’s reference to Stahle’s review makes sense only if it is Stahle’s review of the REsubmitted paper (or at least Stahle’s reaffirmation, after the author’s response, of his original review). Either way, Briffa’s email reveals to Cook that Stahle STILL hates the paper, even after resubmission, whatever that entailed. Even if Briffa’s request could not be interpreted as directly requesting another unkind review from Cook, it clearly biases Cook’s review by informing him that a fellow scientist gave it an unkind review, EVEN AFTER the paper was resubmitted.
“It is clearly Stahle’s review of the REsubmitted paper that Briffa is trying to get support for, not the original review, which became instantly irrelevant upon resubmission. And he is clearly telling Cook not only that Stahle was a fellow reviewer (and if I understand the process correctly, a reviewer of an original submission is not automatically a reviewer of the resubmission of the same paper, so Cook wouldn’t know Stahle had reviewed the resubmitted paper, until Briffa TOLD him), but also that Stahle recommended rejecting the REsubmitted paper. This in itself is a violation of the very “confidentiality” that Briffa is (according to Gavin) reminding Cook of. But, even more damaging, it reveals that Briffa does not care one iota about the confidentiality of “normal” exchanges between author, editor, and reviewer (as he showed time and time again in the hacked CRU emails), but only the confidentiality of his specific request to Cook. And the reason for his concern about the confidentiality of the request is that he knows it’s not kosher. And it’s not kosher because, as Pierce said all along, it’s clearly asking for a bad review of the paper.
“I’m not “imagining” anything, Gavin. It’s right there in black and white. It might take a little logic to understand, but it’s all right there in Briffa’s original statement. The request for a bad review is there (while the caveat that you seem to think is understood clearly is NOT there). The revelation of the content of another reviewer’s review is there (invalidating your explanation for the “confidentially” in the request). Briffa is guilty as sin, and you know it. Not only of attempting to bias Cook’s review, but of violating the same “confidentiality” that YOU claim he is trying to remind Cook of.
“Regards,
“Trevor”
Trevor, are you implying that there is evidence that peer reviewers talked to each other about a paper submitted for publication and are now denying they talked? Wow. If they did indeed talk to one another regarding a paper under review, that is bad form. Bad form.
You may be trying to discipline the dog by whacking his little side kick. Go for the dog. The journal the paper was submitted to is the one you should be corresponding with. If the allegation is true, the journal would have no choice but to block the offending peer-reviewers from reviewing submitted papers. If the journal does not so respond, then an open campaign against the journal would be in order.
Open Office is java which is a butt ugly, it’s the reason why it is free. Since Oracle now will own Sun,java will soon become the Pascal of the future.
Au contraire, we’re reading, taking note …
.
.
I have a little more respect if they’ve done some real-time programming /architecting ‘on the hardware’ using all the interrupts offered in a particular uP family; doing it under VxWorks doesn’t count, extra points if it was done in native assembly and NOT through a complier that accepted C …
.
.
Andy Krause, Open Office is NOT java, although it can use it.
In fact, it’s open source, the number one consideration for us using it at this office. We still use Office 2000, which means newer documents were often difficult to load/use.
OOo has some awesome enhancements, but I find it also has some shameful deficiencies. To me it seems like almost everything is a trade-off. Several things that should be “core function” are broken, as if nobody tested basic functionality (like, say, using the Windows clipboard properly). The enhanced support for “styles” made short work of reformatting several thousand pages of documents, a task that has consumed and/or wasted several months of my work time lately.
However, to be accurate, Open Office cannot “replace” MS Office. It’s a decent alternative, no question. As with everything, make sure you are using the right tool for the job.
Just get a Mac – you know you want one, and you will eventually, inevitably have one, so why not do it now? But I hear Win 7 is quite good, now it’s fixed all the problems with Vista, which fixed all the problems with XP, which fixed all the problems with NT, which fixed all the problems with Win2000, which fixed all the problems with Win 98, which fixed all the problems with Win 95, which fixed all the problems with Win 3.1 … Windows 8 anyone?
“Since any reasonable person would choose a Mac over a PC, Apple’s market share does provide us with an accurate reading of the percentage of reasonable people in our society.”
Roger Ebert
REPLY: I still wonder why people try to convert others to Mac, like a car or clothing or religion, it’s a personal choice. I had one, had two, had three, been there, done that, Win7 on my custom PC gives me everything I need plus flexibility to do it how I want. Also you seem to forget the problems with the early Mac OS….which were fixed by new releases, which I also suffered through. – A
This computer that I use as just an internet computer is an old AMD K-6 500MHZ
system with 384 MB of old slow RAM.
I do just fine using WIN98 on this system and WIN2000 on my other computers, all of which I built many years ago.
What I can’t do with Win98 on this system and Win 2000 on the others I don’t need to be doing anyways!
I have to be fair Anthony, the wife bought me a new Laptop for Xmas pre-loaded with 7 and I did start it up with some “Vista trembles”.
Now after 2 months use without even one hang up and smooth auto-updates, I have to confess that its the best thing from M.S. since the old MSDOS days. Ahhhhh! How I long for “cd\games\crystal caves\” etc. Yep I know, I am a dinosaur, trust me, my son says it at least five times a week!
Well I’m not an IT geek, far from it. Mac has always suited me for what I need to do, but I think commercial considerations have made it into what I always criticised Microsoft for: the boy scout continually helping the old lady over the road – whether she wants to cross or not. I think Mac reached an optimum in usefulness and stability with OS 10.4 and it’s been downhill ever since with their slicker but ever more intrusive system updates. I have always detested most of the iLife apps and they haven’t succeeded yet in forcing this square peg into a round hole; – on the other hand I don’t like working in ugly Windows environments, which I find it still is.
Yes, Al is on the Apple board – and that of Google – but I suspect, only for a few more years until his inevitable downfall with the rest of the AGW crooks. Apple at least for the moment has the wherewithal to weather that storm and I for one hope it does.
—BTW you’ll have gathered that I’m not into gaming.
Or take a walk on the wild side and install ubuntu. Dual boot ubuntu and xp — your poor man’s choice.
Pamela:
I assume you’re being sarcastic in your “astonishment” that the staff at CRU would stoop to attempting to subvert the peer review process. I think we all know that the leaked emails prove this beyond any reasonable doubt. But to answer your question, no, I’m not claiming (in this case) that reviewers of the same article talked directly to each other. I’m claiming (and Briffa’s own email proves this) that 1) Briffa, as editor of the paper in question, revealed to reviewer 2 the main gist of what reviewer 1 had to say about the paper, and 2) Briffa specifically asked reviewer 2 for a bad review of the paper.
The request for a bad review was right there in black and white in Briffa’s email, “Confidentially I now need a hard and if required extensive case for rejecting [an unnamed paper] to support Dave Stahle’s and really as soon as you can.” The Guardian article quoted this line from Briffa’s email to Cook, and RealClimate then tried to explain this as not being in context. Gavin said, basically, that there was an implied “if you recommend rejection”, and thus Briffa was not really requesting a bad review so much as making the point that IF Cook was going to give a bad review, then he needed to make it thorough, which, according to Gavin, is quite common and perfectly acceptable in the peer review process.
But, even if you accept this lame excuse, the word “confidentially” at the beginning of Briffa’s quote reveals that, whatever it was Briffa was doing, he didn’t want anyone outside of Cook and himself to know about it. So why would he want to keep this a secret, if it was on the up-and-up? Gavin’s answer was just as lame as his first answer. He said that the entire peer review process is supposed to be confidential, and reviewers aren’t supposed to see each other’s reviews – only the authors (he later amended this statement, allowing editors to see all reviews, and allowing reviewers of the resubmission to see reviews from the original submission.) And, according to Gavin, this is the kind of confidentiality that Briffa was referring to when he said “confidentially”, not some attempt to hide a shady request.
Now, I don’t have a clue what the rules are for peer review, so I’m taking Gavin’s word on this. But, if one reviewer is not supposed to see another reviewer’s review, then Briffa violated this type of confidentiality by telling Cook that Stahle didn’t like the paper. So it’s hard for me to accept the notion that Briffa would remind Cook of a confidentiality rule that every reviewer already knows, then in the same sentence, violate that same confidentiality rule himself. (It’s also hard for me to accept the notion that Briffa thought Cook needed a reminder of this well-known confidentiality rule, but didn’t need to be told that Briffa’s request for a “hard and … extensive case for rejecting [the paper]” was contingent upon Cook actually recommending rejection, but Gavin didn’t post this comment, and thus didn’t have to answer it.) Gavin’s answer for Briffa’s own violation of the confidentiality rule was that Briffa sent this email to Cook during review of the SECOND submission of the paper, and that his reference to Stahle’s review was actually Stahle’s review of the ORIGINAL paper (this is where Gavin had to expand upon his description of the “author’s eyes only” rule).
In my final comment sent to RealClimate, I first asked Gavin for a clarification of the “author’s eyes only” rule, since he seemed to be changing it to support whatever point he was trying to make at the time. I then went on to say that it didn’t really matter because, if Cook’s review was to be in “support” of Stahle’s review (which it clearly was), then the only review by Stahle he could possibly be referencing was Stahle’s second review. The re-submitted paper, presumably, took Stahle’s first review into account. At the very least, the author(s) submitted a written response to each of Stahle’s criticisms. At that point, Stahle’s original review was meaningless. Of course, he apparently STILL didn’t like the paper, and said so in his second review. And this second review by Stahle was the only review by Stahle that Cook could support at that time. And Briffa very clearly revealed to Cook that this second review was a bad one, that Stahle still hated the paper, even after it was re-submitted. (Actually, in context, it appears to me that Briffa had, in a previous email, included Stahle’s entire second review, but I can’t prove that, so I’ll have to settle for the FACT that Briffa revealed the main gist of Stahle’s second review to Cook while requesting a second review from Cook.) Of course, this in itself is a violation of the “author’s eyes only” rule, even under the relatively lax version of it that Gavin later changed to. But, more importantly (at least for my original point), it re-establishes (after Gavin’s lame attempt to un-establish it) the fact that Briffa had no concern for the type of confidentiality that he was supposedly (according to Gavin) reminding Cook of when Briffa used the word “confidentially”.
I know, that’s a lot of work to get around Gavin’s lame excuse for Briffa’s use of the word “confidentially”. The excuse was patently absurd, and most people would just dismiss it out of hand. And ultimately, all that work was for naught because Gavin completely omitted that last half of my most recent post on RealClimate. Because he didn’t have an answer for my total destruction of his excuse for Briffa. I guess it’s no big newsflash for those who have, on occasion, posted comments on RealClimate that Gavin doesn’t allow comments there that make him, or his cohorts, or his AGW theory, look bad. But I just wanted to document the entire discussion (including those parts omitted by Gavin) here.
Regards,
Trevor
Glad you update went well, Anthony. I just recently upgraded as well. However mine was a bit easier to do since it was a clean install with a new MB, HDD, etc.
Also, saw someone mention their Commodore 64. Well I still have my Vic 20 and it still works great……. As a door stop. 😉
And finally, Trevor, it’s not that anyone is ignoring you, its just that this particular thread is meant more for a bit of geek laughter.
All I can add is that if you like Windows 7 and like the idea of Ubuntu, then you should try SuperOS. You can even upgrade your Ubuntu to SuperOS.
It is a modded version of Ubuntu, which does not quite feel like a Linux to use, and everything works, including wireless networking, printers, sound, Nvidia video card, USB, media files, DVDs, my Epson scanner, and everything else I have thrown at it so far. Most applications install more easily than Windows, using the package manager or AppRunner.
If you have the hardware to run Windows 7 or Vista, all that is needed for those windows apps, is to load VMware or Virtualbox and install a virtual XP or Windows 7 installation, and install your Windows applications there.
No need for a dual boot system, and the lovely double width workspace is really useful. And it is all free.
I objected to that stupid paper clip in the90’s so started using Star Office. Then went to Linux (Red Hat) and all computer problems went away. Now using Debian and Open Office (SEL settings to paranoid). No problems and no cost.
With our office in the Solomon Islands got sick of problems so wiped windows on three computers and loaded Linux and VMWare for the few windows stuff needed. Reloading windows under vmware is just a file copy so saved 1k pm in phone bills.
Thank you for the help.
Will this work in Windows 7?
There is another method to install software i.e. using safe mode. Just press the F8 key when you start your windows. You can also copy the CD to your hard disc and can run the install from set up. Try to run the install from your hard drive in safe mode and see if things work.
If you are still getting the problem to install software then you can just check the manufacturer details on the CD or can visit to the manufacturer’s site. Just get in touch with them over phone or can mail them at their e-mail address.
If you have just downloaded software from the manufacturer’s site then you can visit the site and ask for the trouble shooting. Some good manufacturing sites have message board where you can post your complaints and you will get the answer instantly by the experts.
Nowadays, one can see the number of pornographic, betting, gift offering websites cropping up. The people who have a PC at their places are a worried lot. They want to save their children from these sites ill effect. To counter this people use spyware software to keep a check on their child’s activity. As we all know in the adolescent age the chance of watching pornographic site is quite high and an alert guardian can not afford to ignore this act. Apart from this, there are number of sites where one can get the entire nuisance in the internet sites. However, the software alone can not play the roles of the guardian but definitely it can save a lot of damage. One can see the alert guardians using net nanny software to other spycam to keep a tab on their child. This will help them to keep a track of what they are doing and they could be warned before they fall into any trap. So one can install software and get rid of all their woes.
For readers who have legacy (old) software. If you use Windows XP, you can set up your computer to run both Windows XP and Windows 7.
I don’t want to spend $1000 on an upgrade of one scientific package. So I used the free version of EASEUS to create a new partition and then installed Windows 7 in that partition. GAG is a free Graphical Boot Manager that allows selection of XP or Windows 7.The only caveat is this: While you can access the new partition from XP, you cannot access the XP partition from Windows 7. So your best bet is to make the new partition big enough to hold all your data.
So you can enjoy the security of knowing you can still run your old software while you learn what software will run under Windows 7.
Microsoft is not supporting Windows XP anymore. So the only alternative to Win 7 will be some variety of Linux or the Mac or your old XP in a separate partition.
Linux. Definitely. For years by now.