test-drb

test-drb@ccmp.vtda.org

101090 discussions

Ease of Use (Was: Re: APPLEVISION Monitor)

by mythtech＠mac.com

>> But I'm a geek. At what cost have we dumbed-down the computer >> so that nearly anyone can use it? And are you aware that in >> the minds of marketing people, the market is *far* from >> saturated, as there are still lots of people who never use >> them and don't have them. So you can expect another order of >> magnitude of dumbing-down... > >It is not hiding information that is the problem, it is >locking the knowlage it in a safe, throwing away the key >and dumping in the sea. This is why I think OS X will be favorable with many "geeks". Apple is AOLizing the UI so that people that currently are still afraid of a computer, will be willing to use it. Apple is dumbing it down as much as they can (just look at the colored buttons for close, minimize and expand). BUT... Apple is leaving all the hard core tools there. They aren't stopping anyone from using them. They are just providing pretty front ends to the most commonly needed and wanted tools. Basically, Apple is trying to make OS X a "magic toaster oven"... for the computer afraid, all they have to do is walk up and press a button, and get their toast. But for those that want to, they can press that button on the side, and watch the toaster change into (insert Transformer OO EE OO AA AA noise here) a microwave, or dishwasher, or rocket car, or anything else you darn well want it to. MS seems to want you to buy the toaster, and they will bundle a mop & bucket, light bulb, step stool, and oil filter wrech. All of which will just cause the toaster to suck up enough power to trip your fuse box every few uses. And later, if you decide you want to microwave some popcorn... well, you have to buy the microwave attachment, which won't fit quite right, and will most likely cause your toaster to burn out. But the microwave will be bundled with a lint brush, wrapping paper, bug guard, stapler, and three Mortal Combat action figures. And when you decide you want to use the toaster as a rocket car... well, MS will tell you you can't do that... for that you need to buy "Toaster 2k Pro" and none of the current add ons you bought are legally transferable, so you need to repurchase them and reinstall them from scratch. Oh, and with Toaster 2k Pro, each person that wants to make toast now has to have a seperate permission slip to do so, at $80 a pop. -chris <http://www.mythtech.net>

23 years, 11 months

Installing Windows (was: RE: APPLEVISION Monitor)

by rigdonj＠cfl.rr.com

I've had to reinstall WinTrash 98 at least six times in the past two weeks due to network problems and Robert is correct. Not only do you have to manually input all that stuff but you also have to tell it to add drivers for MODEMs, network cards, Video cards etc etc etc and you have to insert and remove their driver disks frequently along with repeatedly swappin the Win install disks in and out. Further WinTrash frequently can't find the drivers on the disks so you have to search for the files manually and manually enter the full path name for the files. THEN you have to reinstall all of your applications and reset all your favorites, server names and addresses, remove the trash MS applications that WinBlows installs, configure the desktop, add virus protection, firewalls, etc etc. It takes at least a day to get a DECENT system configured and running. However from what I've seen of Linux and most other Unixs, WinBlows is still faster and easier to install for 99.99% of the people. ?NIX is just too cryptic and it seldom comes with hard copies of documentation. (Exactly how are you supposed to refer to documentation or help files when the application/system isn't running? Both ?NIX and MS are lousy in this regard!) Joe At 08:22 AM 5/7/02 -0600, Robert wrote: >Having just (re)installed Win95 twice in 3 weeks on reformatted hard drives >(trying to install Adaptec CD burning software trashed Windows so badly that >I had to reformat the drive to clean up the mess), I can say that an >installation is not one keystroke. You have to agree to the EULA, enter the >serial number, select the install directory, select the type of install, and >must reboot at least once in the process. > >Also, by the way, Win95B is OSR2, IIRC. > >-----Original Message----- >From: Richard Erlacher [mailto:edick@idcomm.com] >Sent: Tuesday, May 07, 2002 12:21 AM >To: classiccmp(a)classiccmp.org >Subject: Re: APPLEVISION Monitor > > >I agree it's a pain to babysit the Windows installation if you have to. An >installation on a bare drive is just one keystroke and a 40-minute wait, >during which you can go out to lunch. It's simply going to assume the >defaults when you do that but at least you get to eat lunch. > >What's really awful is when you upgrade, say, from 95B to 95OSR2, having ><snip> >

23 years, 11 months

Ease of Use (Was: Re: APPLEVISION Monitor)

by dquebbeman＠acm.org

> ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Glen Goodwin" <acme_ent(a)bellsouth.net> > To: <classiccmp(a)classiccmp.org> > Sent: Monday, May 06, 2002 11:07 PM > Subject: Re: APPLEVISION Monitor > > > > From: Sean 'Captain Napalm' Conner <spc(a)conman.org> > > > > > So why do people expect to get immedate work out of a computer without > > > training? > > > > Because Bill Gates said they could. > > > > Glen > > 0/0 > > Is it because of Bill, or because it's simply so? > > Dick Twenty-eight years ago, I walked up to a Teletype ASR33 hooked to a Control Data 6500 and started writing BASIC programs, and the closest thing to training I had was to find a drawer containing some end-user documentation. Five years later, on my first day of my first professional full-time position as a programmer on a system I'd never used before (a Prime), I was handed a magtape from another system I'd used only once or twice (an HP 2000/Access system), and before the day was over, had pulled the programs from the tape and had several of them running. But I'm a geek. At what cost have we dumbed-down the computer so that nearly anyone can use it? And are you aware that in the minds of marketing people, the market is *far* from saturated, as there are still lots of people who never use them and don't have them. So you can expect another order of magnitude of dumbing-down... -dq

23 years, 11 months

APPLEVISION Monitor

by mythtech＠mac.com

> Yes, if you install the Accessibility Options in Windows, there is the >MouseKeys function, which allows you to control the mouse with the numeric >keypad... > > I'm the useless knowledge fountain today, aren't I? ;P Easy Access control panel will do the same IIRC on the Mac. (and it has "sticky keys" which will let you use one finger to press multi-key combos, you start with the first key, and it remembers that it should be down, and lets you move to the next and so forth... it was supposed to help people that had to use things like a bite stick to type) -chris <http://www.mythtech.net>

23 years, 11 months

Apple CD 150.

by mythtech＠mac.com

> 1./ It ejects CD's when I insert them. Is it sick or is it > just trying to say "invalid SCSI connection"? > There currently is none. I have this nagging feeling that drive will not take and hold a CD unless it is connected to a Mac. Otherwise, check the front eject button and make sure it isn't stuck. You may have to remove the faceplate, many mac eject buttons are actually just as pass thru button to the real drive button behind it. If you can't get it up and going, I will try to remember to look at mine when I get home tonight. See if there is anything else I can suggest to try. > 2./ I'm using the standard CD caddies, is that OK? Yes, it should work with any old CD caddies. Apple's caddies were nice, but I have used generic ones on that drive in the past without problem. -chris <http://www.mythtech.net>

23 years, 11 months

APPLEVISION Monitor,, No shell = No power

by mythtech＠mac.com

>The Macintosh doesn't even offer a command line interface, right? System 1.0 thru OS 9.x.... no, no command line, no need for it. OS-X, yes, there is one IF you wish to use it, but there is very little need for it (and less and less of one with each update issued) -chris <http://www.mythtech.net>

23 years, 11 months

source for 82S141?

by jwest＠classiccmp.org

Anyone have a reasonable source for Phillips 82S141's? I also need 82S129's - Jameco has these around 7 bucks a pop, but was curious of anyone knows of a better price/source. Thanks! Jay West

23 years, 11 months

APPLEVISION Monitor, Anything !Windows = Cryptic ?

by csmith＠amdocs.com

> -----Original Message----- > From: Cameron Kaiser [mailto:spectre@stockholm.ptloma.edu] > > Bash is the 'borne-again shell' (a user-friendly version of > the Bourne > > Shell. > Of course, *real* men use tcsh. ;-) ;-) ;-) Actually, I found the bourne shell to be user-friendly enough for me. ;) (I do like some bash features, like the command- history and what not, so I use it on that account) Chris Christopher Smith, Perl Developer Amdocs - Champaign, IL /usr/bin/perl -e ' print((~"\x95\xc4\xe3"^"Just Another Perl Hacker.")."\x08!\n"); '

23 years, 11 months

2708 Programming Algorithm?

by dwightk.elvey＠amd.com

>From: ard(a)p850ug1.demon.co.uk > >> >> Hi >> I believe the main difference between the 2708 and 8708 is that >> the 8708 could handle negative levels on the data bus so it >> could be connected directly to the 8080's data bus. > >Err, Every 8080 I've ever used has had TTL levels on all the pins apart >from the clock inputs. There is no problem using 'normal' EPROMs with an >8080 AFAIK > >-tony > Hi I couldn't remember exactly what it was so I looked it up. I was both right and wrong. First, it wasn't negative levels, it was positive levels. The 8080 requires 3.3 volt highs on their inputs. Most TTL only require 2.5 volts. Intel made a number of parts compatable with these higher input threshold levels. The statement that 8080's are TTL compatable is only mostly true. They could drive TTL but to receive from TTL often required pull-up resistors or drivers that had higher outputs. So, it was drive level and not input voltage that was significant. Dwight

23 years, 11 months

APPLEVISION Monitor

by csmith＠amdocs.com

> -----Original Message----- > From: Doc [mailto:doc@mdrconsult.com] > I have done software support in a Windows environment, and > I have done > training of both adults and children in both Linux and Windows. > Chris's crack about finding the new document after writing it, in > Windows, was dead on. My stint as "the computer guy" in a > Windows shop > was in a University of Texas research lab. Not exactly morons I was Well, Doc -- you're not the only one who's had to support windows. ;) Chris Christopher Smith, Perl Developer Amdocs - Champaign, IL /usr/bin/perl -e ' print((~"\x95\xc4\xe3"^"Just Another Perl Hacker.")."\x08!\n"); '

23 years, 11 months

APPLEVISION Monitor

by mythtech＠mac.com

>I can't remember an instance where a Mac application allowed the >user to enter the colons, although they were used internally, and >you could use them in some developer tools that gave command >lines or operated on "makefile"s. I'm unaware of any "consumer" application that presents the colon to you EXCEPT Script Editor when writing AppleScripts. But that should really fall under the dev tools catagory, I just figured it was worth a mention since it is installed with the default OS install. I can say for sure that no time is the average user of a Mac forced to deal with the colon for a path. For that matter, no time is the average Mac user forced to deal with a path at all... on the Mac it is all laid out in terms of storage inside folders. Sure, underneath the surface that is all directory path stucture, but from the UI standpoint, it is much more friendly to just think "I put my resume inside my Documents folder". Windows has gotten MUCH MUCH better at removing the path structure from the user, but it still isn't quite there (witness just about any application installer that will still ask if you want to store the app in "C:\Program Files\MyApp") -chris <http://www.mythtech.net>

23 years, 11 months

APPLEVISION Monitor

by mythtech＠mac.com

>Chris (and everybody, for that matter) try OS X, if you get the >chance. I think you'll like it, especially if you have some experience >with *BSD or *nix already. Or I could show you next time you're up here, >Chris... I have X installed on another partition on my home iMac. I use it from time to time, but I have a number of tools that I need that are classic only, and just work better under OS 9 native. Although, the #1 tool is Interarchy's stream watching abilities. They don't offer an X version, so I have to use the os 9 version, which won't work under classic. But this was really an issue of *nix ignorance. Interarchy removed the ability from the X version, because BSD already HAS the ability, something that I only just became aware of. Chances are good, this weekend, I will boot back into X and give it another whirl (my other hold out is a good web browser that will ALSO let me do the daily AOL crossword puzzle... so far only IE in X will do it, and I prefer not to run MS stuff if I have a choice) -chris <http://www.mythtech.net>

23 years, 11 months

APPLEVISION Monitor, Anything !Windows = Cryptic ?

by csmith＠amdocs.com

> -----Original Message----- > From: Raymond Moyers [mailto:rmoyers@nop.org] > Unix, for years, shipped with a editor nobody could use > and backspace key that did not work, and seemed rigged Hmm -- the backspace key has always worked for me, and the editor, while being not incredibly nice, was useable. > Linux is the first nix i saw that came out of the install > with a working backspace key and several editors > that a person new to Unix could use. Obviously, you hadn't been introduced to IRIX or NeXTSTEP. > I credit these two things for its success, no longer > did it have two most fierce deterrents to learning. I never saw them as real problems. The editor could be replaced, and if you don't like the way the backspace key works, you can re-assign it. :) Chris Christopher Smith, Perl Developer Amdocs - Champaign, IL /usr/bin/perl -e ' print((~"\x95\xc4\xe3"^"Just Another Perl Hacker.")."\x08!\n"); '

23 years, 11 months

APPLEVISION Monitor,, No shell = No power

by csmith＠amdocs.com

> -----Original Message----- > From: Richard Erlacher [mailto:edick@idcomm.com] > While I agree there is plenty of room for preferences, I > don't see why one > would want everything isolated from everything else on the > LAN, when the > existence of the LAN is warranted by the need for shared > access. ON top of If you're talking about his remote X session in a separate window, I think he's emulating a not-so-good "feature" of windows, there, actually. Have you used Citrix, for instance, or "microsoft terminal server?" I like the normal X11 way of handling local and remote applications identically. > that, typing half a screenful of text just to make some file > on some other > machine accessible seems a mite burdensome. Even under DOS > it only takes a > single half-line of text. Heh -- Yep. I think he gave you a bad example. You know about NFS (or AFS, or whatever), right? One can configure these once, in the one line you speak of, and have another system's files available thereafter as if they were your own. SSH (previously RSH would have done...) will allow you to use remote CPU resources if you like, too, and in the same single line. > Some people just like *NIX because it enables them to stroke > their own need > for pseudo-sophistry. As with any platform. I can't argue that. Chris Christopher Smith, Perl Developer Amdocs - Champaign, IL /usr/bin/perl -e ' print((~"\x95\xc4\xe3"^"Just Another Perl Hacker.")."\x08!\n"); '

23 years, 11 months

Ease of Use (Was: Re: APPLEVISION Monitor)

by dquebbeman＠acm.org

> "Douglas H. Quebbeman" wrote: > > > But I'm a geek. At what cost have we dumbed-down the computer > > so that nearly anyone can use it? And are you aware that in > > the minds of marketing people, the market is *far* from > > saturated, as there are still lots of people who never use > > them and don't have them. So you can expect another order of > > magnitude of dumbing-down... > > It is not hiding information that is the problem, it is > locking the knowlage it in a safe, throwing away the key > and dumping in the sea. Agreed, that happens all-too frequently... but many of us here are dedicated to the prevention of knowledge becoming lost, and where possible, to its rediscovery. A late visit last night dropped paper listings of stuff I did 20+ years ago that I've been unable to recover from magtape. It's a bit 'o typing, but if we can't get the tapes read, you can bet your bottom dollar I'll be typing it back in. -dq

23 years, 11 months

APPLEVISION Monitor

by mythtech＠mac.com

>Go on, nick a fruit sticker and scan it in as proof, dare ya... I tried, but none of the McIntosh apples had stickers that say the name on it. And the shelf tag was a nice plastic expensive looking plate with nutritional info and stuff on it. Of course you would think that would stop me from trying to take it, but no, it was the strong glue holding it to the produce cabinet that kept it from being mine. I did however buy one (figured it would be a good lunch snack), so I have the nice sticker that says "#4019" to remind the minimum wage cashier what number to punch in to charge me correctly. BUT... as it should happen, the register receipt on their nice new fancy POS terminal did show the name. (Point Of Sale for the acronym impaired, not Piece Of Sh*t although I think the cashier would argue in favor of the latter). So the following link is a scan of my receipt (and the #4019 sticker) showing the name as the receipt printed it. If anyone wishes to still say the fruit is spelled MacIntosh, well, I leave it to them as an exercise in web searching to validate it. <http://www.mythtech.net/McIntosh.jpg> -chris <http://www.mythtech.net>

23 years, 11 months

So-Called Real Programmers and FORTRAN

by Robert_Feldman＠jdedwards.com

The nice thing is that both TP 5.5 and TC 2.01, along with TC++1.0, are available for free download from Borland at https://community.borland.com. -----Original Message----- From: Allison [mailto:ajp166@bellatlantic.net] Sent: Tuesday, May 07, 2002 8:09 AM To: classiccmp(a)classiccmp.org Subject: Re: So-Called Real Programmers and FORTRAN From: Glen Goodwin <acme_ent(a)bellsouth.net> >> From: Ben Franchuk <bfranchuk(a)jetnet.ab.ca> > >> I think small and clean ( bootstrap able too is handy) languages are few >> and far between. C was that at one time, but not any more. While I don't >> expect complers to run in 64kb I think 64 Meg is far too much bloat. > >So, use an older C compiler. I still use Turbo C++ 1.0. The C++ >implementation sucks, but for "real" C code under MS-DOS, it still kicks >ass, and runs in 640 Kb. I wish I had something as good for CP/M-86 :>( Borland TurboPascal V5.5 and TurboCV2.01 They are 8086 sized and still produce good code that seems to run fine under W98se and NT4. Allison

23 years, 11 months

ARM Interfaces TIDE (Transputer IDE) Tram

by RMeenaks＠olf.com

An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.classiccmp.org/pipermail/cctalk/attachments/20020507/3cbfff5f/at…

23 years, 11 months

APPLEVISION Monitor, Anything !Windows = Cryptic ?

by csmith＠amdocs.com

> -----Original Message----- > From: Richard Erlacher [mailto:edick@idcomm.com] > I just consider "user-friendly" as being such that you can > take an unitiated > but interested party, set them down at the console, and > expect them to be able > to do what they want to do without first attending extensive > training. I know Most computer systems could claim that title, then. I don't know of any system, for instance, where word processing requires extensive training. (I am assuming that by "do what they want," you'd mean to exclude writing device drivers ;) At a very worst, one must convince them to type the command for the word processor, and start writing. > Windows does that, however, and so, apparently does the Mac, > though I find it > confusing because it's not what I've grown to know, if not love. Again, I think most systems do. It's probably just a question of degree, and doubtless there's a point beyond which you'd call a system "user friendly." You seem to treat "user friendly" as an end in itself, or perhaps it's the means to get more work from your employees? I see it as a means of using the computer to do what I want, so the "user friendly" must not get in the way of doing that. Any system where that happens, no matter how "user friendly," seems downright hostile to me. :) Also remember that "user friendly" is relative. It's a difficult matter to find a good, generic user interface. It's fine to design machines to do one thing, or a few things, and they'll do them very well if the people working on the design know what's going on. Making a generic system is more difficult. There's the matter of scope: what should the system do? There are trade-offs in simplicity vs. completeness. Many other problems arise too. I don't think anyone has ever done this perfectly, and everyone who tries has some problems. In fact, many of the problems stem from conscious design choices. I'm sure that until this hypothetical "perfect interface" appears, we will all have our preferences. This interface is not acceptable, for reason Q; this other one won't work, because it's difficult to do Z... ... but this one is "user friendly," because it does what I want it to do. What, you don't do much lambda calculus? Use it anyway, it's "user friendly!" No, there's no word processor available, but who cares... ;) Anyway, you get the point, I'm sure. For a windows user to say to somebody "windows is user-friendly, because it lets me run office apps easily" is silly, since the next person may not care a bit for office apps. I could tell that same person "windows is user hostile, because it's difficult to handle dynamic libraries, and its API is a mess." Will that matter to the user? (The answer is yes, but they don't know it, so they don't care.) It's all in what you're doing, and what you can put up with to get it done. Chris Christopher Smith, Perl Developer Amdocs - Champaign, IL /usr/bin/perl -e ' print((~"\x95\xc4\xe3"^"Just Another Perl Hacker.")."\x08!\n"); '

23 years, 11 months

X config

by meltie＠myrealbox.com

Has anyone got a config - ie modeline to run a DEC VR319 (-DA) or VR297 in X they can grab and post for me? Thanks Alex -- My computer's heavier than yours.

23 years, 11 months

APPLEVISION Monitor

by csmith＠amdocs.com

> -----Original Message----- > From: Richard Erlacher [mailto:edick@idcomm.com] > > Maybe they're willing to type a couple lines for the sake of > > the added reliability, maybe it's easier for them to type > Now just a minute there, Chris ... You don't make any fewer > typos than I do Nope, and I handle it fine. > and if I had to type a line of gibberish such as what you > showed us all a week > or so ago and then figure out what was mistyped I'd go blind. You do realize that any sane person would never write code that looks like that, unless he were using TECO? ;) At any rate, that was Perl. There is a windows port too, and it's certainly not a requirement. > Every keystroke > is a mistake waiting to happen. How do more keystrokes make > it more reliable? I think you may have misread me there. It's not the keystrokes that make it reliable, it's the underlying system that accepts them. Remember, I don't trust windows. (Possibly more than you distrust Unix...) I'd rather use a command line system and know (or at least believe ;) that it will do what I ask without having anything explode, and without making me wait until it finishes thrashing itself into oblivion. Admittedly, windows is better recently on those two counts, but I can not trust it to stay that way, and it's not good enough yet, anyway. Unfortunately, I'm forced to use windows in my work, (I assume and hope that you're no longer forced to use Unix in yours) so I imagine that I have a fairly good idea of the current windows platform. It still strikes me as severely lacking in several departments (some subjective, and some not), including reliability. Chris Christopher Smith, Perl Developer Amdocs - Champaign, IL /usr/bin/perl -e ' print((~"\x95\xc4\xe3"^"Just Another Perl Hacker.")."\x08!\n"); '

23 years, 11 months

Installing Windows (was: RE: APPLEVISION Monitor)

by Robert_Feldman＠jdedwards.com

Having just (re)installed Win95 twice in 3 weeks on reformatted hard drives (trying to install Adaptec CD burning software trashed Windows so badly that I had to reformat the drive to clean up the mess), I can say that an installation is not one keystroke. You have to agree to the EULA, enter the serial number, select the install directory, select the type of install, and must reboot at least once in the process. Also, by the way, Win95B is OSR2, IIRC. -----Original Message----- From: Richard Erlacher [mailto:edick@idcomm.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 07, 2002 12:21 AM To: classiccmp(a)classiccmp.org Subject: Re: APPLEVISION Monitor I agree it's a pain to babysit the Windows installation if you have to. An installation on a bare drive is just one keystroke and a 40-minute wait, during which you can go out to lunch. It's simply going to assume the defaults when you do that but at least you get to eat lunch. What's really awful is when you upgrade, say, from 95B to 95OSR2, having <snip>

23 years, 11 months

APPLEVISION Monitor

by mythtech＠mac.com

>However, if you use the Find command (assuming you know the name of the file, >or at least an extension), there's some help there. That's better than I did >with the Apple "finder," whatever that is... Find file has been included with the Mac OS since I think System 6, maybe 7 (either way, for some 10+ years). Command-F from the finder... or go to the File menu and choose "Find" (where, it should logically be... you want to find a "file" go to the "file" menu, and choose "find"). But we know you haven't used a Mac since right after the Lisa came out, so you probably messed with System 4 or 5 as the latest, which IIRC you actually had to run the Find desk accessory manually to search for a file. Granted, the IE warped versions of Windows have that nice "Search" button in the folder views, which is a little easier. Is there a find button in the windows of OS-X? (Dave? Anyone? Sorry, not a huge X user yet, I can't quote all the features off the top of my head yet) -chris <http://www.mythtech.net>

23 years, 11 months

APPLEVISION Monitor

by acme_ent＠bellsouth.net

> From: Chris <mythtech(a)mac.com> > I can't... I just can't any more. I have been trying to be nice to > Richard despite all the clear flame bait he has been throwing out here. > > I'm sorry... I just can't do it any more. Perhaps a VRE (Victims of Richard Erlacher) support group (alt.support.vre?) is needed to assist those of us who have suffered repeated neurological meltdowns as a result of exposure to the content of his posts ;>) Glen 0/0

23 years, 11 months

So-Called Real Programmers and FORTRAN

by ajp166＠bellatlantic.net

From: Glen Goodwin <acme_ent(a)bellsouth.net> >> From: Ben Franchuk <bfranchuk(a)jetnet.ab.ca> > >> I think small and clean ( bootstrap able too is handy) languages are few >> and far between. C was that at one time, but not any more. While I don't >> expect complers to run in 64kb I think 64 Meg is far too much bloat. > >So, use an older C compiler. I still use Turbo C++ 1.0. The C++ >implementation sucks, but for "real" C code under MS-DOS, it still kicks >ass, and runs in 640 Kb. I wish I had something as good for CP/M-86 :>( Borland TurboPascal V5.5 and TurboCV2.01 They are 8086 sized and still produce good code that seems to run fine under W98se and NT4. Allison

23 years, 11 months

Jump to page:

2026

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

2001

2000

1999

1998

1997

test-drb