The Ultimate Qwerky Keyboard
Re: The Ultimate Qwerky Keyboard
You may not know because you haven't looked into it, but Windows 10 is designed to run Linux. There is a subsystem for several distros in fact. They do it using the Windows kernel and not via emulation. So, I suppose you would now suggest that Windows is really Linux in disguise. LOL
Re: The Ultimate Qwerky Keyboard
Unless they've changed something major, I don't see how the Windows NT Kernel could parse UNIX/Linux without an emulator to change how Linux programs address the kernel.
But then, what do you mean by 'run Linux'? Linux is a kernel, GNU is the next level up, and then all the Distro's.
Once you get up into the Distro's, you are talking only about programs, and any program can be ported to run on any OS.
Ubunti, Linux Mint, BSD, RedHat, etc. these are all only Programs, designed to use the Linux Kernel, but could be ported over to use any kernel.
Now if you are saying Windows10 has a built in system to create a build by porting it over to NT, then I would say sure that is easily doable.
After all, many Linux programs have already been ported over to use on NT based machines, and OSX machines as well.
It wouldn't be hard to port Ubuntu over for use on an NT based machine.
But no, I don't think I would say Windows is really Linux, because they don't use the Linux kernel, they use the NT kernel.
That being said, I suppose it is possible computers have become advanced enough that a single machine could use more than one kernel. Just like now we no longer have to boot into a new kernel anymore, the machine will use the new kernel without rebooting. So perhaps Windows could use the NT kernel, or the Linux kernel, depending upon which program was called to run at the time.
On the other hand, what it sound more like to me, is just like Windows has hijacked other Linux programs for their own use and made them proprietary. I would really think Windows has an ulterior motive behind allowing Linux to run on their OS. Perhaps trying to capture back those they lost to Linux, or making Linux their own proprietary system through theft.
If folks knew they could run FREE Linux software and programs on their Windows10 computer, why would they buy expensive proprietary Windows software and programs? Would you pay 900 bucks for PhotoShop when GIMP is FREE?
Or buy msOffice with OpenOffice and LibreOffice are both FREE, and already work on Windows anyhow.
But then, what do you mean by 'run Linux'? Linux is a kernel, GNU is the next level up, and then all the Distro's.
Once you get up into the Distro's, you are talking only about programs, and any program can be ported to run on any OS.
Ubunti, Linux Mint, BSD, RedHat, etc. these are all only Programs, designed to use the Linux Kernel, but could be ported over to use any kernel.
Now if you are saying Windows10 has a built in system to create a build by porting it over to NT, then I would say sure that is easily doable.
After all, many Linux programs have already been ported over to use on NT based machines, and OSX machines as well.
It wouldn't be hard to port Ubuntu over for use on an NT based machine.
But no, I don't think I would say Windows is really Linux, because they don't use the Linux kernel, they use the NT kernel.
That being said, I suppose it is possible computers have become advanced enough that a single machine could use more than one kernel. Just like now we no longer have to boot into a new kernel anymore, the machine will use the new kernel without rebooting. So perhaps Windows could use the NT kernel, or the Linux kernel, depending upon which program was called to run at the time.
On the other hand, what it sound more like to me, is just like Windows has hijacked other Linux programs for their own use and made them proprietary. I would really think Windows has an ulterior motive behind allowing Linux to run on their OS. Perhaps trying to capture back those they lost to Linux, or making Linux their own proprietary system through theft.
If folks knew they could run FREE Linux software and programs on their Windows10 computer, why would they buy expensive proprietary Windows software and programs? Would you pay 900 bucks for PhotoShop when GIMP is FREE?
Or buy msOffice with OpenOffice and LibreOffice are both FREE, and already work on Windows anyhow.
Re: The Ultimate Qwerky Keyboard
I believe every version of Windows 10 can enable the Linux subsystem via the Control Panel
If you want to read Micdrosoft's explanation of it, here it is ==> https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/wsl/faq
My explanation doesn't include the technical methods, but there is reference to a blog in the article that does. The bottom line is that you are correct about the Linux kernel not being part of the Windows operating system. That would be just as insane as Linux WINE installing a Windows kernel to do what it does. Also, the typical air head Windows user would not want to run Linux this way because there are none of the usual GUI amenities available, such as X-term, unless you are clever enough to install them yourself. Basically this feature of Windows allows any file that can be executed on a Linux platform to be run via Bash, which is only useful for developers. Why would Microsoft encourage Linux developers to create apps for Windows? Ohhhh, I dunno. It might have something to do with mobile apps and Windows as a Service. But that's just a guess on my part. You'd need to talk to Microsoft to find out what their real motivations are.
If you want to read Micdrosoft's explanation of it, here it is ==> https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/wsl/faq
My explanation doesn't include the technical methods, but there is reference to a blog in the article that does. The bottom line is that you are correct about the Linux kernel not being part of the Windows operating system. That would be just as insane as Linux WINE installing a Windows kernel to do what it does. Also, the typical air head Windows user would not want to run Linux this way because there are none of the usual GUI amenities available, such as X-term, unless you are clever enough to install them yourself. Basically this feature of Windows allows any file that can be executed on a Linux platform to be run via Bash, which is only useful for developers. Why would Microsoft encourage Linux developers to create apps for Windows? Ohhhh, I dunno. It might have something to do with mobile apps and Windows as a Service. But that's just a guess on my part. You'd need to talk to Microsoft to find out what their real motivations are.
Re: The Ultimate Qwerky Keyboard
A very interesting read Yogi!
To me it looks like it is only for running BASH scripts and nothing more.
The Windows RUN command, which uses their Terminal, has very few commands available, and almost no tools.
And as far as I recall, you could never write many scripts for Windows Terminal either.
Although I myself do not know how to write BASH scripts, I still have a few I use every day, several times a day myself, written for me by others who know how to write BASH scripts.
The ability to use BASH commands on a Windows computer would make life a whole lot easier for those who stick their nose under the hood of Windows computers. But then I read in the article you sent me to, what you can do with it is still greatly limited.
Appears it is not designed to run Linux programs on Windows, merely to use some Linux commands in Terminal, and be able to load some Linux scripts into Terminal to run them. The script file names are still limited to only those characters Windows allows.
Which by the way is why many files, namely thousands of photo files I saved on Linux appeared missing when the external drive was connected to a Windows machine. It did not recognize the file naming convention I was using.
Once I learned that, I went through and changed my file naming system, which was not as intuitive as what I had, but at least Windows users could now see them and access the images.
To me it looks like it is only for running BASH scripts and nothing more.
The Windows RUN command, which uses their Terminal, has very few commands available, and almost no tools.
And as far as I recall, you could never write many scripts for Windows Terminal either.
Although I myself do not know how to write BASH scripts, I still have a few I use every day, several times a day myself, written for me by others who know how to write BASH scripts.
The ability to use BASH commands on a Windows computer would make life a whole lot easier for those who stick their nose under the hood of Windows computers. But then I read in the article you sent me to, what you can do with it is still greatly limited.
Appears it is not designed to run Linux programs on Windows, merely to use some Linux commands in Terminal, and be able to load some Linux scripts into Terminal to run them. The script file names are still limited to only those characters Windows allows.
Which by the way is why many files, namely thousands of photo files I saved on Linux appeared missing when the external drive was connected to a Windows machine. It did not recognize the file naming convention I was using.
Once I learned that, I went through and changed my file naming system, which was not as intuitive as what I had, but at least Windows users could now see them and access the images.
Re: The Ultimate Qwerky Keyboard
The article gives a good description of what is going on with the Linux subsystem but it doesn't give a complete picture. This is true with most software instruction manuals I've ever read. They will go into great detail telling you what every button, key, and command does but never explain why you would want to do those things. LOL
The Windows Run command is limited to running the built in functions that come with the Windows operating system. If you needed a batch file DOS was the way to go, but that has been replaced with what they call Windows PowerShell. As the name implies it is designed to run shell scripts exactly the same as Bash. A lot can be done using only Bash, or only the PowerShell, but for the most part only bitheads would appreciate that kind of functionality. In that regard Bash of itself is limited. However, there are services such as xterm and the X Windows System which will allow the generation of a graphical user interface (GUI). All those Bash scripts can be sent to the xterm for displaying the familiar application front ends we deal with every day. The authors of the Linux subsystem article assume you know that. LOL
Microsoft had aspirations of taking over the mobile computing world as well as smartphones. Why not? They are big enough. When they came to the marketplace late, they discovered that desktop computing was already dead. Microsoft had nothing to offer as a replacement. The only saving grace is the size of their user base, a captive audience if you will. I think Microsoft has made it past the critical point of survival in spite of their lack of a relevant product to replace desktops. They are surviving off services such as cloud computing instead of relying on their operating system as the cornerstone of their business. Microsoft Office is everywhere, but who in their right mind uses an office suite on their smartphone? It's limited in functionality on a tablet. I believe Microsoft will continue to dominate the desktop and laptop arena well into the foreseeable future. That market is shrinking but will not go away. Thus Microsoft's core competency is being eroded by the natural forces of high tech progress. They are getting into other things now, such as gaming and virtual reality, all of which goes to show how irrelevant the desktop market is becoming. Linux, in spite of it's dreamy eyed supporters, will never overtake Microsoft's role in desktops and laptops. Linux developers, like Microsoft, hasn't yet figured out what to do about the new world order.
The Windows Run command is limited to running the built in functions that come with the Windows operating system. If you needed a batch file DOS was the way to go, but that has been replaced with what they call Windows PowerShell. As the name implies it is designed to run shell scripts exactly the same as Bash. A lot can be done using only Bash, or only the PowerShell, but for the most part only bitheads would appreciate that kind of functionality. In that regard Bash of itself is limited. However, there are services such as xterm and the X Windows System which will allow the generation of a graphical user interface (GUI). All those Bash scripts can be sent to the xterm for displaying the familiar application front ends we deal with every day. The authors of the Linux subsystem article assume you know that. LOL
Microsoft had aspirations of taking over the mobile computing world as well as smartphones. Why not? They are big enough. When they came to the marketplace late, they discovered that desktop computing was already dead. Microsoft had nothing to offer as a replacement. The only saving grace is the size of their user base, a captive audience if you will. I think Microsoft has made it past the critical point of survival in spite of their lack of a relevant product to replace desktops. They are surviving off services such as cloud computing instead of relying on their operating system as the cornerstone of their business. Microsoft Office is everywhere, but who in their right mind uses an office suite on their smartphone? It's limited in functionality on a tablet. I believe Microsoft will continue to dominate the desktop and laptop arena well into the foreseeable future. That market is shrinking but will not go away. Thus Microsoft's core competency is being eroded by the natural forces of high tech progress. They are getting into other things now, such as gaming and virtual reality, all of which goes to show how irrelevant the desktop market is becoming. Linux, in spite of it's dreamy eyed supporters, will never overtake Microsoft's role in desktops and laptops. Linux developers, like Microsoft, hasn't yet figured out what to do about the new world order.
Re: The Ultimate Qwerky Keyboard
Hmmm. More and more applications are being done from the Cloud. And yes Micro$oft is who is powering many of these applications. But the Cloud Servers hosting these programs are running Linux Server Farms.
I read an article not to long ago about why they chose Linux, and it is not only because of the high cost of running MS Servers, it had to do a lot with the many tasks servers must handle. MS just isn't up to par with the big guys needs.
Many servers do offer MS Server for users who want to run only on MS and not Linux, but even so, Linux is what is running the servers themselves.
I think folks can already subscribe to MS OFFICE On-line for a monthly fee. Or packages of several different programs they may use often enough to warrant paying a monthly fee to have access to.
I pay an annual fee to use a few on-line programs, and a couple of them I chose to pay for a lifetime membership, then suddenly I've not had the need to use them in a few years. So it is good I have a lifetime membership as long as they are still there. I've been burned twice on lifetime memberships because the companies sold out, and the company the sold out to decided to dump servicing those from the former company after a couple of years. Or made so many changes to the programs they no longer did what we needed them to do.
The thing is, there are a lot of folks like me out there that just cannot afford to pay a monthly fee to use a program, especially if we rarely use it.
I have one right now I'm using, I had it turned off for a year, so they offered me a half-price deal to get it back for six months. I took it, planned on doing more with it, but time slipped away and it expires next month. I can't afford to pay the regular fee of a 100 bucks for six months, especially when I don't have time to make use of it right now. So, will have to turn it off again before they charge me automatically on my credit card.
I know you love Mickey$oft programs, and I'm not too fond of them.
Even so, I'm quite happy with all of the Linux based programs I use, and have access to some programs I rarely use anytime I need them, and it is all for free. Albeit I do donate a little to the programmers and maintainers of the ones I use most often.
I read an article not to long ago about why they chose Linux, and it is not only because of the high cost of running MS Servers, it had to do a lot with the many tasks servers must handle. MS just isn't up to par with the big guys needs.
Many servers do offer MS Server for users who want to run only on MS and not Linux, but even so, Linux is what is running the servers themselves.
I think folks can already subscribe to MS OFFICE On-line for a monthly fee. Or packages of several different programs they may use often enough to warrant paying a monthly fee to have access to.
I pay an annual fee to use a few on-line programs, and a couple of them I chose to pay for a lifetime membership, then suddenly I've not had the need to use them in a few years. So it is good I have a lifetime membership as long as they are still there. I've been burned twice on lifetime memberships because the companies sold out, and the company the sold out to decided to dump servicing those from the former company after a couple of years. Or made so many changes to the programs they no longer did what we needed them to do.
The thing is, there are a lot of folks like me out there that just cannot afford to pay a monthly fee to use a program, especially if we rarely use it.
I have one right now I'm using, I had it turned off for a year, so they offered me a half-price deal to get it back for six months. I took it, planned on doing more with it, but time slipped away and it expires next month. I can't afford to pay the regular fee of a 100 bucks for six months, especially when I don't have time to make use of it right now. So, will have to turn it off again before they charge me automatically on my credit card.
I know you love Mickey$oft programs, and I'm not too fond of them.
Even so, I'm quite happy with all of the Linux based programs I use, and have access to some programs I rarely use anytime I need them, and it is all for free. Albeit I do donate a little to the programmers and maintainers of the ones I use most often.
Re: The Ultimate Qwerky Keyboard
Before Windows, before Linux, and even before UNIX, there was something called the Bourne shell. All the operating systems you and I ever heard of, and many we have not, are derivations of that original scripting language. I fully recognize how insignificant Windows is in terms of life at the shell level. It's just one of many that came from the same source. All of the operating systems with which we are familiar have their reason for being, and it's short sighted to say one is better than the other. One may perform certain tasks more efficiently than the other, but who is to say the needs of one user are paramount when compared to another?
You and I have vastly different exposure to computers and software. We came into the arena from different points in the universe. Your small business needs are no comparison to what enterprise level computing must accomplish. Thus different needs demand different solutions. I truly believe you know and understand this concept.
Like politics, it appears to be frivolous to point out the shortcomings of the competition. I've worked extensively with UNIX and servers as well as Windows and workstations. In the final analysis everybody gets their job done using tools that are appropriate for their environment ... and budget. The draw to any given OS is how well it fulfills your needs. To argue one system is better than thee other is a pissing contest and nothing more. Discussing the merits of each, however, is educational.
You and I have vastly different exposure to computers and software. We came into the arena from different points in the universe. Your small business needs are no comparison to what enterprise level computing must accomplish. Thus different needs demand different solutions. I truly believe you know and understand this concept.
Like politics, it appears to be frivolous to point out the shortcomings of the competition. I've worked extensively with UNIX and servers as well as Windows and workstations. In the final analysis everybody gets their job done using tools that are appropriate for their environment ... and budget. The draw to any given OS is how well it fulfills your needs. To argue one system is better than thee other is a pissing contest and nothing more. Discussing the merits of each, however, is educational.
Re: The Ultimate Qwerky Keyboard
I agree with you on all the above Yogi!
Excluding my early computing experience with the Heath/Zenith Octal Entry, and early Apple I motherboard.
I found my Apple II+ computer to suit my needs, and it was easier to write Basic programs for the 6502, than it was for the 8080a processors. I had both, Apples and Trash-80s, and always fell back to the Apple for things I needed to accomplish for work.
Moving on along to PCs and MACs, I could do so much more on a MAC than I could on a PC, using store bought programs. Even the same program one a MAC version and one a PC version, you couldn't do on a PC what you could on a MAC.
My experience with MAC is why we chose the LISA system for the florist. I'll admit it was a mistake, because the LISA system was a lousy system. But then we made a Major Leap to a Mainframe System. I was not an owner of the business, and the President of the company is who worked out a deal with WANG. Turned out the Wang did everything he wanted it to do and more, plus we sold time on the machine to others, through Wang, which made the machine almost pay for itself.
I know I said this a while back, but Wang built me a small home computer, which ran both Wang and PC on the same computer. Or I should say, Wang OS and Micro$oft OS and programs, and this was not a dual boot machine either. Maybe Wang was Mickey$oft underneath, I don't know, I just know I could run MS Software on my PC, and also run Wang programs with .exe extensions, which were designed for PC but did the same thing as the programs in the mainframe Wang at work.
I was doing transcription work on the Apples and on the MACs, but most of my clients had moved on to Windows, so the Wang PC was a necessity in order to start provided them with copies of my work in MS formats.
For numerous years after that I always bought PCs and ran Windows OSs and Software for Windows.
I did tinker with Linux a couple of times but it was always way over my head, and basically useless back then for home users. There really was no good OSs yet, except for RedHat and it too was very iffy, and you couldn't do much with it. Nobody made the programs I needed. So it was Windows all the way up until they released Vista.
That is when I took a second look at Linux and everything worked so well for me, I slowly began doing everything on Linux, and only a few things on Windows machines. I had a lot of money in Windows programs that kept needing upgraded to newer versions. It got to the point I could not afford to upgrade, so kept using the older Windows programs until when I did finally buy a new upgraded program, all of my old saved data would not work on the new upgrade. The only way to get it to work would be to go back several generations, buying each, and only using them to upgrade in stages until I was up to the current version.
I said NO, and converted all of my data to Linux programs. And as far as I'm concerned, it was the best move I've ever made. 90% of my data is shareable with Windows systems, and able to be uploaded to on-line websites for whatever purpose I need the data on-line. One example is my genealogy files uploaded to Ancestry. Or my books uploaded to publishers, e-book or print versions.
The biggest plus for me about using Linux is I can use OLD computers which will not run Windows10 at all, and keep them going for several things I use computers for. Nothing fancy though, I have the Silver Yogi now for everything fancy, hi hi.
Excluding my early computing experience with the Heath/Zenith Octal Entry, and early Apple I motherboard.
I found my Apple II+ computer to suit my needs, and it was easier to write Basic programs for the 6502, than it was for the 8080a processors. I had both, Apples and Trash-80s, and always fell back to the Apple for things I needed to accomplish for work.
Moving on along to PCs and MACs, I could do so much more on a MAC than I could on a PC, using store bought programs. Even the same program one a MAC version and one a PC version, you couldn't do on a PC what you could on a MAC.
My experience with MAC is why we chose the LISA system for the florist. I'll admit it was a mistake, because the LISA system was a lousy system. But then we made a Major Leap to a Mainframe System. I was not an owner of the business, and the President of the company is who worked out a deal with WANG. Turned out the Wang did everything he wanted it to do and more, plus we sold time on the machine to others, through Wang, which made the machine almost pay for itself.
I know I said this a while back, but Wang built me a small home computer, which ran both Wang and PC on the same computer. Or I should say, Wang OS and Micro$oft OS and programs, and this was not a dual boot machine either. Maybe Wang was Mickey$oft underneath, I don't know, I just know I could run MS Software on my PC, and also run Wang programs with .exe extensions, which were designed for PC but did the same thing as the programs in the mainframe Wang at work.
I was doing transcription work on the Apples and on the MACs, but most of my clients had moved on to Windows, so the Wang PC was a necessity in order to start provided them with copies of my work in MS formats.
For numerous years after that I always bought PCs and ran Windows OSs and Software for Windows.
I did tinker with Linux a couple of times but it was always way over my head, and basically useless back then for home users. There really was no good OSs yet, except for RedHat and it too was very iffy, and you couldn't do much with it. Nobody made the programs I needed. So it was Windows all the way up until they released Vista.
That is when I took a second look at Linux and everything worked so well for me, I slowly began doing everything on Linux, and only a few things on Windows machines. I had a lot of money in Windows programs that kept needing upgraded to newer versions. It got to the point I could not afford to upgrade, so kept using the older Windows programs until when I did finally buy a new upgraded program, all of my old saved data would not work on the new upgrade. The only way to get it to work would be to go back several generations, buying each, and only using them to upgrade in stages until I was up to the current version.
I said NO, and converted all of my data to Linux programs. And as far as I'm concerned, it was the best move I've ever made. 90% of my data is shareable with Windows systems, and able to be uploaded to on-line websites for whatever purpose I need the data on-line. One example is my genealogy files uploaded to Ancestry. Or my books uploaded to publishers, e-book or print versions.
The biggest plus for me about using Linux is I can use OLD computers which will not run Windows10 at all, and keep them going for several things I use computers for. Nothing fancy though, I have the Silver Yogi now for everything fancy, hi hi.
Re: The Ultimate Qwerky Keyboard
I worked with computers well before they became Personal and readily available to the average consumer. The first computer I purchased was an HP 80 which had two modes of programming; Octal and HP Basic. My experience at work was with Hexidecimal and I could not understand why HP decided to go it's own path. There were few generally available programs in those days, but Word Star was among them. Word Star would not run in HP Basic nor was it octal coding. It did boot, however, and that was my first introduction to Word processing. It was all run off 5" floppies. Anything else I wanted to do, I had to write the program myself. LOL
It took a long time after that before I got a real computer for home use. It was a WalMart special, but I didn't get it from WalMart. I don't think they were invented yet in those days. The Internet wasn't called the Internet either. What I'm getting at is that my earliest involvement with computers were UNIX servers and Apple PC's. We went with Apple because at the time Motorola was making the processors for them. When Apple moved over to Intel, we switched to Microsoft.
The group I worked with was led by a fellow who had a big interest in Linux. He didn't talk Fedora, and I don't recall what it is he did fancy. I asked him one time why we don't switch to the FOSS servers with Linux. He said the main problem with Linux was the lack of support. As an enterprise we could not afford to be down while waiting for a possible solution to show up in a forum. There were no on-site service people for Linux in those days. We could not get anybody to rush over immediately with a new Linux server if ours shut down. So, IBM and HP were the servers of choice and they ran AIX and POSIX. Yes, we had deals with IBM and HP wherein they would have standby replacement equipment ready to swap out even if we called them at 1:00 AM Christmas Day. That kind of service didn't exist yet with anything Linux. There were a few Linux boxes around but nothing that was for corporate or manufacturing use. They were cute, and in fact they were what got me interested in Linux in the first place.
Linux was attractive to me because nobody knew much about it and it was brand new. In retrospect I think that's one of the big attractions to Windows. It was "new" every few years and did require state of the art hardware. Since all my personal needs were not for business purposes, I had no problem pursuing cutting edge software/hardware. I mean, after all, that is what Motorola did. They were a bleeding edge technology company for a long time. It rubbed off on me.
It took a long time after that before I got a real computer for home use. It was a WalMart special, but I didn't get it from WalMart. I don't think they were invented yet in those days. The Internet wasn't called the Internet either. What I'm getting at is that my earliest involvement with computers were UNIX servers and Apple PC's. We went with Apple because at the time Motorola was making the processors for them. When Apple moved over to Intel, we switched to Microsoft.
The group I worked with was led by a fellow who had a big interest in Linux. He didn't talk Fedora, and I don't recall what it is he did fancy. I asked him one time why we don't switch to the FOSS servers with Linux. He said the main problem with Linux was the lack of support. As an enterprise we could not afford to be down while waiting for a possible solution to show up in a forum. There were no on-site service people for Linux in those days. We could not get anybody to rush over immediately with a new Linux server if ours shut down. So, IBM and HP were the servers of choice and they ran AIX and POSIX. Yes, we had deals with IBM and HP wherein they would have standby replacement equipment ready to swap out even if we called them at 1:00 AM Christmas Day. That kind of service didn't exist yet with anything Linux. There were a few Linux boxes around but nothing that was for corporate or manufacturing use. They were cute, and in fact they were what got me interested in Linux in the first place.
Linux was attractive to me because nobody knew much about it and it was brand new. In retrospect I think that's one of the big attractions to Windows. It was "new" every few years and did require state of the art hardware. Since all my personal needs were not for business purposes, I had no problem pursuing cutting edge software/hardware. I mean, after all, that is what Motorola did. They were a bleeding edge technology company for a long time. It rubbed off on me.
Re: The Ultimate Qwerky Keyboard
I wish I would have taken my dad's advice and got into the computing world while it was in its infancy.
Although dad didn't like computers until after he retired and began working with them for his son, my brother.
He could see the light, especially after he saw all the work I accomplished using my little Apple II computer.
What normally took me about four hours per day to do, I was getting done in around 15 minutes or less, after I wrote the Basic programs to make what I entered come out in the format I needed.
At that time I still had to write down the answers on these plastic cards we used to keep track of everything. But then we bought a dot matrix printer, made for Ford Aerospace but resold to businesses through FTD.
I loved playing around with the computers to see what I could make them do. And I'm kicking myself in the butt for not accepting the job with Beagle Bros. when it was offered. I only knew how to program in Basic at the time, and they were using C or something considered REAL programming languages, hi hi. Nevertheless, they loved all the weird things I could do with Basic and especially how I could make programs that would undo what the big programmers would do to lock disks to prevent copying. I think that is how Beagle Bros. got their start was by writing ways to crack locked programs.
I had another friend about that time who landed a job with a commercial computing company, and his job was to go around installing programs at like grocery stores and car dealers, etc. He called himself a programmer because he went around programming the machines. Turns out all he did was install programs and nothing more.
But then as the company he worked for grew, they taught him one thing after another until he did eventually learn enough to rightfully be called a programmer. He helped write the programs, but then too, what he really did was just assemble modules together to provide the tools the customer needed. Even so, they were paying him big bucks, about four times what I was making at the time.
My biggest problem is, If I don't do something every day, day in and day out, I forget how to do something.
Even now, it irks me to no end that I will need to do something and open a program I've used numerous times, but not in the last year, and I have to learn how to do even the most simple of tasks all over again. Which has nothing to do with my epilepsy problem which causes the same thing once every five years. I believe my problem is use it or lose it.
Heck, I have to study how to do something to make even a simple change on my websites, which is why I don't often make changes or add anything anymore. No time to bone up on how to do it. Too many irons in the fire.
The only time I really learned much at all was the short time we had the Wang VS 300 mainframe. But even then, Wang is who did everything for us from programming to installing new software. But their were areas of the computer I could try my own hand at writing simple programs, which were in a program similar to Basic but not quite.
To me, Basic was sorta logical in how it worked. The Wang version was slightly more complicated and sometimes didn't make sense. It was like you had to do things backwards, and/or tell the machine what you wanted to do before you did it. Well, I guess that is true in all cases, even Basic.
It just boggles the mind how smart a programmer who programs the actual CPU chips must have to be. I mean, someone had to write the programs that lay between the CPU and the various interpretive languages before the primary programming languages. Boggles the mind!
Although dad didn't like computers until after he retired and began working with them for his son, my brother.
He could see the light, especially after he saw all the work I accomplished using my little Apple II computer.
What normally took me about four hours per day to do, I was getting done in around 15 minutes or less, after I wrote the Basic programs to make what I entered come out in the format I needed.
At that time I still had to write down the answers on these plastic cards we used to keep track of everything. But then we bought a dot matrix printer, made for Ford Aerospace but resold to businesses through FTD.
I loved playing around with the computers to see what I could make them do. And I'm kicking myself in the butt for not accepting the job with Beagle Bros. when it was offered. I only knew how to program in Basic at the time, and they were using C or something considered REAL programming languages, hi hi. Nevertheless, they loved all the weird things I could do with Basic and especially how I could make programs that would undo what the big programmers would do to lock disks to prevent copying. I think that is how Beagle Bros. got their start was by writing ways to crack locked programs.
I had another friend about that time who landed a job with a commercial computing company, and his job was to go around installing programs at like grocery stores and car dealers, etc. He called himself a programmer because he went around programming the machines. Turns out all he did was install programs and nothing more.
But then as the company he worked for grew, they taught him one thing after another until he did eventually learn enough to rightfully be called a programmer. He helped write the programs, but then too, what he really did was just assemble modules together to provide the tools the customer needed. Even so, they were paying him big bucks, about four times what I was making at the time.
My biggest problem is, If I don't do something every day, day in and day out, I forget how to do something.
Even now, it irks me to no end that I will need to do something and open a program I've used numerous times, but not in the last year, and I have to learn how to do even the most simple of tasks all over again. Which has nothing to do with my epilepsy problem which causes the same thing once every five years. I believe my problem is use it or lose it.
Heck, I have to study how to do something to make even a simple change on my websites, which is why I don't often make changes or add anything anymore. No time to bone up on how to do it. Too many irons in the fire.
The only time I really learned much at all was the short time we had the Wang VS 300 mainframe. But even then, Wang is who did everything for us from programming to installing new software. But their were areas of the computer I could try my own hand at writing simple programs, which were in a program similar to Basic but not quite.
To me, Basic was sorta logical in how it worked. The Wang version was slightly more complicated and sometimes didn't make sense. It was like you had to do things backwards, and/or tell the machine what you wanted to do before you did it. Well, I guess that is true in all cases, even Basic.
It just boggles the mind how smart a programmer who programs the actual CPU chips must have to be. I mean, someone had to write the programs that lay between the CPU and the various interpretive languages before the primary programming languages. Boggles the mind!
Re: The Ultimate Qwerky Keyboard
There is programming, and there are programming languages. If you learn programming, the languages you learn are ancillary. Languages are just the tools used to program. Your memory leakage problem would indeed affect your ability to use the tools, but it would not hinder the programming mindset. You need to think logically and you need to anticipate things that are not planned to happen when you assemble a computer program. I believe you can do that already. It also helps to have a good understanding of how a CPU does what it does. The logic behind programming and choosing the correct tools become easier when you are familiar with how things get done on silicon chips.
My unrealized dream was in the world of cyber security. It just got too complicated for me, plus I never earned a college degree. I never had a chance to pursue that goal professionally. Hackers take advantage of people's shortcomings. It just thrills me to no end to be able to hack the hacker and subvert their efforts. Unfortunately, only the best of the best are at that level of programming. Talk about being in demand and naming your own price ...
My unrealized dream was in the world of cyber security. It just got too complicated for me, plus I never earned a college degree. I never had a chance to pursue that goal professionally. Hackers take advantage of people's shortcomings. It just thrills me to no end to be able to hack the hacker and subvert their efforts. Unfortunately, only the best of the best are at that level of programming. Talk about being in demand and naming your own price ...
Re: The Ultimate Qwerky Keyboard
It's easy to see I don't understand diddly squat about computers or their programming levels to make them work. At best I can do a little HTML and that's about it.
That being said, when I first got my Heath/Zenith Octal Entry 8 bit computer, I bought lots of books to study. I may have actually learned a little back then, since I was able to enjoy using that little computer. Even bought a paper tape punch and reader for it. But then too, technically it was just a toy, never used it for anything worthwhile.
It wasn't until I bought the Apple I motherboard, managed to get it assembled and working. And if I recall, the simple language we used to program it wasn't even real Basic yet. Seems like it was called DOPE, which was apropos for me, hi hi. It wasn't hard to learn because it only had a little over a dozen commands.
By the time I bought my first assembled Apple II, we had Basic, and when I got the Apple II+, the number of commands in Basic had grown considerably.
Seems like I tried both Cobol and Fortran and both were over my head, even when I was younger and smarter, hi hi.
That being said, when I first got my Heath/Zenith Octal Entry 8 bit computer, I bought lots of books to study. I may have actually learned a little back then, since I was able to enjoy using that little computer. Even bought a paper tape punch and reader for it. But then too, technically it was just a toy, never used it for anything worthwhile.
It wasn't until I bought the Apple I motherboard, managed to get it assembled and working. And if I recall, the simple language we used to program it wasn't even real Basic yet. Seems like it was called DOPE, which was apropos for me, hi hi. It wasn't hard to learn because it only had a little over a dozen commands.
By the time I bought my first assembled Apple II, we had Basic, and when I got the Apple II+, the number of commands in Basic had grown considerably.
Seems like I tried both Cobol and Fortran and both were over my head, even when I was younger and smarter, hi hi.
Re: The Ultimate Qwerky Keyboard
From what your posts say here about your background you are pretty much a self-educated person. There is an old Paul Simon song that seems apropos:
- When I think back
On all the crap I learned in high school
It's a wonder
I can think at all
And though my lack of education
Hasn't hurt me none
I can read the writing on the wall
Re: The Ultimate Qwerky Keyboard
PhD is only BS Piled higher and Deeper, hi hi.
I don't have a degree in anything either, but it didn't really matter as what I learned had to do with our family business, and ironically, we did not hire folks with degrees because we considered them untrainable.
Even so, I still have a lot of years of school under my belt. Mostly to keep my licenses up, and some to learn.
I've probably attended more seminars than most of those with PhDs.
I removed all of the descriptive text to these and so stated where it was removed.
But this will give you an idea of how much schooling and seminars I've attended over the years.
Continuing Education:
Washington University and Missouri Botanical Gardens - 1971, 1974, 1979, 1981 and 1983, Plant Biology, Business and Greenhouse Management; (additional text deleted).
Rutgers University - Horticulture - 1973 - Dr. Dominic Durkin; (additional text deleted).
University of Wisconsin, Department of Business - 1977 & 1982 - Independent study program - Management, Economics, Business Advertising and Promotion. (additional text deleted).
University of Missouri, Extension Division - 1977 & 1984; Classes in Pathology and Entomology. (additional text deleted).
Meramec Community College - 1980; Commercial, Residential and Auto Air Conditioning. (additional text deleted).
University of British Columbia at Vancouver, Canada - 1982 and also
University of Guelph, Ontario, Canada - 1982/83; Hydroponic Nutrients, Dr. Howard Resh; (additional text deleted).
University of Missouri - Columbia Extension Division - 1984; Commercial Maintenance Applications. Pesticides. (additional text deleted).
***
Further Continuing Education Classes:
Longwood Gardens Horticultural Trainee Program,
Floriculture Greenhouse Operations & Management Techniques
University of Kentucky, Floral Arranging
***
Horticultural Seminars:
West Virginia University
University of Arizona
North Carolina State University
Washington State University
University of Kentucky
Michigan State University
United States Department of Agriculture (I attended over 50 of these seminars)
Society of American Florists (Over 300 monthly seminars attended)
American Academy of Floriculture
American Florists Marketing Council
A lot of good it has done me, hi hi.
I don't have a degree in anything either, but it didn't really matter as what I learned had to do with our family business, and ironically, we did not hire folks with degrees because we considered them untrainable.
Even so, I still have a lot of years of school under my belt. Mostly to keep my licenses up, and some to learn.
I've probably attended more seminars than most of those with PhDs.
I removed all of the descriptive text to these and so stated where it was removed.
But this will give you an idea of how much schooling and seminars I've attended over the years.
Continuing Education:
Washington University and Missouri Botanical Gardens - 1971, 1974, 1979, 1981 and 1983, Plant Biology, Business and Greenhouse Management; (additional text deleted).
Rutgers University - Horticulture - 1973 - Dr. Dominic Durkin; (additional text deleted).
University of Wisconsin, Department of Business - 1977 & 1982 - Independent study program - Management, Economics, Business Advertising and Promotion. (additional text deleted).
University of Missouri, Extension Division - 1977 & 1984; Classes in Pathology and Entomology. (additional text deleted).
Meramec Community College - 1980; Commercial, Residential and Auto Air Conditioning. (additional text deleted).
University of British Columbia at Vancouver, Canada - 1982 and also
University of Guelph, Ontario, Canada - 1982/83; Hydroponic Nutrients, Dr. Howard Resh; (additional text deleted).
University of Missouri - Columbia Extension Division - 1984; Commercial Maintenance Applications. Pesticides. (additional text deleted).
***
Further Continuing Education Classes:
Longwood Gardens Horticultural Trainee Program,
Floriculture Greenhouse Operations & Management Techniques
University of Kentucky, Floral Arranging
***
Horticultural Seminars:
West Virginia University
University of Arizona
North Carolina State University
Washington State University
University of Kentucky
Michigan State University
United States Department of Agriculture (I attended over 50 of these seminars)
Society of American Florists (Over 300 monthly seminars attended)
American Academy of Floriculture
American Florists Marketing Council
A lot of good it has done me, hi hi.
Re: The Ultimate Qwerky Keyboard
You, like me, are one smart cookie, but not as smart as those folks who have that university degree attached to their name. That's not to say either one of us are more successful than the others. The truth is that the degree is a standard of comparison. If you have not achieved the standard there is no need to compare you to the others who do. It may not be fair, but it is the way things are done. I see that you even kept those "standard bearers" off your payroll so that your company too used it for internal purposes.
Re: The Ultimate Qwerky Keyboard
I can't say we NEVER hired someone with a degree, it was just our policy not to, but for a very logical reason.
Employee Turnover.
Gods Truth Here - The majority of our cut flower shop employees (excluding delivery drivers) who started with us in their teens, were still working for us to retirement, and some all the way into their 70s.
But the times were different back then for them to be with us that long.
We used to tease a couple of them that they had more seniority than the boss, hi hi.
The boss of the cut flower shop passed from my grandfather to my father.
Almost all of our employees during my dad's reign, were with us for at least 20 years, and some up until we closed up shop in 1984. We did outsource them to other florists so they were not without jobs of equal pay or better.
As for as those who came to work for us who did have degrees, most of them considered the job temporary, only until they could find something in the fields they studied in. I should also not, in most cases, they were the son or daughter of one of our long time employees, and/or a relative, hi hi. Many of these never stayed more than a couple of years, tops.
But to hire a total stranger, a job seeker who boasted a degree, they would have a better chance of getting a job with us than as an ice cube in hell. Simply because we knew they wouldn't stay more than a year or two. The only exception was a degree in floral design, or in the case of greenhouse workers, horticultural degrees.
Now in the greenhouses, we did have several with degrees, but they had to have them for the departments they were working in. We did have on-site labs, and several other things a person with a degree was a plus to get the job. But then here too, we usually did not have a turnover in those departments, because they were working in their field, and earning good pay too. It's actually hard to find a job in the horticulture field with a degree, unless it is at a farming operation, and even then that is iffy and much harder work than working in a lab, so they never left until they retired, and/or started their own business, which many did.
Now in my old age and poor health, I probably should have taken MONEY more seriously.
When I think back to all the businesses I started that became profitable, and I turned around and sold them to my best employee with a deal they couldn't refuse, it was literally like throwing money away.
I also wasted a lot of money with my various hobbies.
But to be fair, I also stashed away one heck of a lot of money for my retirement.
I just never counted on having to pay exorbitant medical bills, since we always had great health insurance.
I'm twice a widower, and both cost me thousands of dollars, the latter hundreds of thousands of dollars.
When her insurance capped out, and after exhausting all of our savings, I then began refinancing my house, selling off properties, you name it, anything to cover those bills for her. If you have any assets at all there is no help available to you. Even when I had no assets left, I still had to pay those bills, and could not find help anywhere.
Those were sad days my friend, and although I managed to get through them and back on my feet.
Now that I'm no longer healthy, and quickly running out of funds, I dread to think of what may be coming up.
I had better shut up before make myself depressed, hi hi.
Employee Turnover.
Gods Truth Here - The majority of our cut flower shop employees (excluding delivery drivers) who started with us in their teens, were still working for us to retirement, and some all the way into their 70s.
But the times were different back then for them to be with us that long.
We used to tease a couple of them that they had more seniority than the boss, hi hi.
The boss of the cut flower shop passed from my grandfather to my father.
Almost all of our employees during my dad's reign, were with us for at least 20 years, and some up until we closed up shop in 1984. We did outsource them to other florists so they were not without jobs of equal pay or better.
As for as those who came to work for us who did have degrees, most of them considered the job temporary, only until they could find something in the fields they studied in. I should also not, in most cases, they were the son or daughter of one of our long time employees, and/or a relative, hi hi. Many of these never stayed more than a couple of years, tops.
But to hire a total stranger, a job seeker who boasted a degree, they would have a better chance of getting a job with us than as an ice cube in hell. Simply because we knew they wouldn't stay more than a year or two. The only exception was a degree in floral design, or in the case of greenhouse workers, horticultural degrees.
Now in the greenhouses, we did have several with degrees, but they had to have them for the departments they were working in. We did have on-site labs, and several other things a person with a degree was a plus to get the job. But then here too, we usually did not have a turnover in those departments, because they were working in their field, and earning good pay too. It's actually hard to find a job in the horticulture field with a degree, unless it is at a farming operation, and even then that is iffy and much harder work than working in a lab, so they never left until they retired, and/or started their own business, which many did.
Now in my old age and poor health, I probably should have taken MONEY more seriously.
When I think back to all the businesses I started that became profitable, and I turned around and sold them to my best employee with a deal they couldn't refuse, it was literally like throwing money away.
I also wasted a lot of money with my various hobbies.
But to be fair, I also stashed away one heck of a lot of money for my retirement.
I just never counted on having to pay exorbitant medical bills, since we always had great health insurance.
I'm twice a widower, and both cost me thousands of dollars, the latter hundreds of thousands of dollars.
When her insurance capped out, and after exhausting all of our savings, I then began refinancing my house, selling off properties, you name it, anything to cover those bills for her. If you have any assets at all there is no help available to you. Even when I had no assets left, I still had to pay those bills, and could not find help anywhere.
Those were sad days my friend, and although I managed to get through them and back on my feet.
Now that I'm no longer healthy, and quickly running out of funds, I dread to think of what may be coming up.
I had better shut up before make myself depressed, hi hi.
Re: The Ultimate Qwerky Keyboard
I'm the last guy on earth who should offer comforting quotes from the Bible, but there is one that seems apropos:
‘Then I commended mirth, because a man hath no better thing under the sun, than to eat, and to drink, and to be merry (for tomorrow we shall die)’'
I had no idea that was actually two quotes until I looked it up.
I personally gave up on religion because I've learned the hard way about it's empty promises. I've become more existential in my old age, but, then, I'm still relatively healthy. I learned something important when mom needed a caregiver. I was told it's not about recovering anymore. It's all about the quality of life from here on out. My job as caregiver was to assure the quality of her life was high as it could be.
Yeah, life comes to an end all to quickly. But we do have a choice about how we approach that end.
‘Then I commended mirth, because a man hath no better thing under the sun, than to eat, and to drink, and to be merry (for tomorrow we shall die)’'
I had no idea that was actually two quotes until I looked it up.
I personally gave up on religion because I've learned the hard way about it's empty promises. I've become more existential in my old age, but, then, I'm still relatively healthy. I learned something important when mom needed a caregiver. I was told it's not about recovering anymore. It's all about the quality of life from here on out. My job as caregiver was to assure the quality of her life was high as it could be.
Yeah, life comes to an end all to quickly. But we do have a choice about how we approach that end.
Re: The Ultimate Qwerky Keyboard
I believe in God and Christ, but not necessarily about anything regarding religion, since they are all man-made means of extortion.
The bible considered most correct is the KJV, and I have a problem with it because it was completely rewritten in 1769 to make heavy use of the newly invented letter "J."
There is no letter "J" in the Hebrew, Greek, or Aramaic languages.
The Greek had a letter "I" which was assumed to sound like a "J", but that's really impossible.
How does one get from Yahushua, to Ieusus, to Jesus? They used naming equivalents!
I pulled a mean trick on the Sunday school students once many eons ago when I filled in as teacher in a class.
I knew the names of the students from the roll call sheet, which I obtained ahead of time.
I looked up the naming equivalent for each name, and picked a name for each student so none would be duplicated.
Then at roll call, I called each by their equivalent name. Naturally no one raised their hand.
When I got to the end of the roll call, I asked the class why no one responded when I called their name.
But teach, you never called our names, are you sure you have the right roll call list.
Then I went one by one through the roll call again, and asked John why he didn't respond when I called Ian, and went through the entire list that way.
At the end, I told them why I did it, and about all the names in the bible that start with the letter "J" or have that letter in the names.
I also had a bigger surprise for them. My late wife was raised in the Jewish faith, and spoke Hebrew fluently, as did her two kids. It was actually fun finding out the real names of the characters in the old testament. Not that I remember any of them anymore.
My whole point was, naming equivalents do not work, and therefore should not have been used in the translated scriptures.
I could tell you stories about some of the churches I've belonged to over the years.
Including some we normally consider as cults, hi hi. By the way, they are!
I'll save this for some day when I'm not out of time.
The bible considered most correct is the KJV, and I have a problem with it because it was completely rewritten in 1769 to make heavy use of the newly invented letter "J."
There is no letter "J" in the Hebrew, Greek, or Aramaic languages.
The Greek had a letter "I" which was assumed to sound like a "J", but that's really impossible.
How does one get from Yahushua, to Ieusus, to Jesus? They used naming equivalents!
I pulled a mean trick on the Sunday school students once many eons ago when I filled in as teacher in a class.
I knew the names of the students from the roll call sheet, which I obtained ahead of time.
I looked up the naming equivalent for each name, and picked a name for each student so none would be duplicated.
Then at roll call, I called each by their equivalent name. Naturally no one raised their hand.
When I got to the end of the roll call, I asked the class why no one responded when I called their name.
But teach, you never called our names, are you sure you have the right roll call list.
Then I went one by one through the roll call again, and asked John why he didn't respond when I called Ian, and went through the entire list that way.
At the end, I told them why I did it, and about all the names in the bible that start with the letter "J" or have that letter in the names.
I also had a bigger surprise for them. My late wife was raised in the Jewish faith, and spoke Hebrew fluently, as did her two kids. It was actually fun finding out the real names of the characters in the old testament. Not that I remember any of them anymore.
My whole point was, naming equivalents do not work, and therefore should not have been used in the translated scriptures.
I could tell you stories about some of the churches I've belonged to over the years.
Including some we normally consider as cults, hi hi. By the way, they are!
I'll save this for some day when I'm not out of time.
Re: The Ultimate Qwerky Keyboard
One of the problems I have with Bibles in general is that I find it unreasonable to expect events that occurred thousands of years ago to be recorded accurately dozens of centuries later. Plus, I'm not one inclined to blindly accept any of those Biblical events actually happened in the first place. It's more likely a compilation of allegorical stories than a recorded history of events. Then, too, there is what you point out. A lot of things get lost in translation, or added. The premise of it all is highly suspect in my mind.
Religion is part of a greater philosophical understanding of the human experience. As such it's impossible for me to see how any one of them could apply to the masses. It's all personal and unique as one's own lifestyle. The "Good News" has been corrupted many times over to manipulate and control people which diminishes its divine nature to my way of thinking. In any case, I've been engaged in many discussions and arguments regarding god and religion, all to no avail. Well, not totally wasted in that I did manage to learn how other people see it first hand. Frankly I can't debate it with any authority because I have not studied religion in any depth. All I have is inputs from other people and how they see things. My basic instincts say it's all bogus. I'll go with that and be surprised if I find out otherwise.
Religion is part of a greater philosophical understanding of the human experience. As such it's impossible for me to see how any one of them could apply to the masses. It's all personal and unique as one's own lifestyle. The "Good News" has been corrupted many times over to manipulate and control people which diminishes its divine nature to my way of thinking. In any case, I've been engaged in many discussions and arguments regarding god and religion, all to no avail. Well, not totally wasted in that I did manage to learn how other people see it first hand. Frankly I can't debate it with any authority because I have not studied religion in any depth. All I have is inputs from other people and how they see things. My basic instincts say it's all bogus. I'll go with that and be surprised if I find out otherwise.
Re: The Ultimate Qwerky Keyboard
I attended three different theological seminaries. Not a one taught the same things the same way. One I scratch off my list as being totally off the wall. But the other two were both mainstream, and still taught opposite things in many areas.
Over the years I've studied many books, even delving back into the many religions of Babylon, and all the crazy things folks believed and/or worshiped.
I think what surprised me most was finding there is harmony in the Scriptures. Documents written during different eras all line up exactly. Although hard to read, I had a copy of the 1611 King Iames Bible, and could refer back to older bibles from it. Although there are some strange changes made in some bibles, especially if they use the fragmented scrolls, if they use the complete texts, then they all match up fairly well.
The 1769 King James Bible seems to me to be the most accurate and nearly every historical event has been proven through archaeology and by science as well.
I was raised Catholic and got away from their false teachings as soon as my parents would let me.
About the only times I found correct teaching was when I was with small non-denominational or un-denominational groups.
Seems to me, if they are part of a religion, regardless of which religion, they take things out of context to create their own rules and tenets, which in most cases, they themselves don't even follow in accord with their own teachings.
The Catholics have their own Douay Bible, it's fairly close to the KJV, nevertheless, the things their bible tell them not to do, it seems they go out of their way to do just that, and even turn a lot of it into rituals.
Church of God does not believe in musical instruments, but the choir director uses a musical instrument to get the choir in tune. They make exceptions for themselves, hi hi.
I could go on and on, but can surmise it by saying, the Mormon's had one thing right. All religions are wrong, hi hi.
Over the years I've studied many books, even delving back into the many religions of Babylon, and all the crazy things folks believed and/or worshiped.
I think what surprised me most was finding there is harmony in the Scriptures. Documents written during different eras all line up exactly. Although hard to read, I had a copy of the 1611 King Iames Bible, and could refer back to older bibles from it. Although there are some strange changes made in some bibles, especially if they use the fragmented scrolls, if they use the complete texts, then they all match up fairly well.
The 1769 King James Bible seems to me to be the most accurate and nearly every historical event has been proven through archaeology and by science as well.
I was raised Catholic and got away from their false teachings as soon as my parents would let me.
About the only times I found correct teaching was when I was with small non-denominational or un-denominational groups.
Seems to me, if they are part of a religion, regardless of which religion, they take things out of context to create their own rules and tenets, which in most cases, they themselves don't even follow in accord with their own teachings.
The Catholics have their own Douay Bible, it's fairly close to the KJV, nevertheless, the things their bible tell them not to do, it seems they go out of their way to do just that, and even turn a lot of it into rituals.
Church of God does not believe in musical instruments, but the choir director uses a musical instrument to get the choir in tune. They make exceptions for themselves, hi hi.
I could go on and on, but can surmise it by saying, the Mormon's had one thing right. All religions are wrong, hi hi.