All the Windows kiddies have been ejaculating all over each other because the "Gold" release of Windows 98 Third Edition (ME) is being pirated as of June 23/00. It's not expected to hit the shelf until September.
Its nice to see someone else acknowledge this, the disk really does go crazy in Windows NT 2000, when it initializes the hd during the startup splash screen, I fear that the hard drive is going to fail it thrashes so much, and during login too. I don't see how the Microsoft crowd can say this beast of an OS is faster than its 9x brothers. And this is on a 466 with 96mb ram too.
This software is provided by the authors ``as is'' and any express or implied warranties, including, but not limited to, the implied warranties of merchantability and fitness for a partiticular purpose are disclaimed. In no even shall the authors be liable for any direct, indirect, incidental, special, exemplary, or consequential damages (including but not limited to, procurement of substitute goods or services; loss of use, data, or profits; or business interruption) however caused and on any theory of liability, whether in contract, strict liability, or tort (including negligence or otherwise) arising in any way out of the use of this software, even if advised of the possibility of damage.
Red Hat also ships with lynx, arena, emacs... I haven't used RedHat since 5.0 but you get the idea. They also are not polluting the operating environment with a browser, and they do not own the browser. And Linux is not RedHat. And you can download a Linux based operating system AND the browsers for free on the internet, as opposed to pirating Windows 98/2000 and/or downloading free(beer) IE5.
Well, you can download ssh1 or ssh2 and its free for personal use, but I think its not free for commercial use, however 1.2.27 was totally free, and OpenSSH is what resulted. Its compatible with its commercial counterpart, and totally free. See where I'm going with this?
Actually Linux is owned by Linus, it is licensed under the GPL. Linus could pervert the kernel to another agenda except that there are a lot in the kernel that isn't his, and you can see that when you read the source comments. This makes it necessary for him to get ALL those authors' consent in order for him to change the license, which is near impossible, and intentional by design. I think he explained this in his interview with Boot magazine (now maximumpc and maximumlinux) Check out the bsdcomp modules in the kernel.
boot: Will there be a time when Linux won't be available for free? Torvalds: No.
boot: You say that very quickly. Torvalds: Yes. One of the reasons I say it quickly is I've been asked the question before, and I also have made certain there is no way anybody can take the freeness away. I very strongly feel that it's a good thing, and the copyright requires it. And when somebody sends me big patches, I don't ask them to assign the copyright over to me. So right now, for example, the kernel itself has probably on the order of 50 or 100 copyright holders and the actual copyright license has always been the same. It's the GPL that requires that sources always be available. So in order to make a version of Linux that is not under that license, you have to get all those copyright holders to agree to the new license. The parts of the kernel that I own completely are significant, but they aren't enough to really make a good system. I did that consciously. I wanted to bind my own hands so that even if people don't trust me personally, they trust the fact that even if I wanted to turn commercial, I couldn't.
Now explain to me exactly how that is hush hush? Thanks for the link, allow me to save the other readers having to click it, I'll extract the relevant parts right here.
1.Click Start, point to Settings, click Control Panel, and then double-click System.
2.Click the General tab.
3.Locate the version number under the System heading, and then see the following table.
Release Version File dates USB support Is USB support downloadable?* Windows 95 retail 4.00.950 7/11/95 no no Windows 95 retail SP1 4.00.950A 7/11/95 no no OEM Service Release 1 4.00.950A 7/11/95 no no OEM Service Release 2 4.00.1111 (4.00.950B) 8/24/96 no no OEM Service Release 2.1 4.03.1212-1214 (4.00.950B) 8/24/96-8/27/97 yes n/a OEM Service Release 2.5 4.03.1214 (4.00.950C) 8/24/96-11/18/97 yes n/a *If you have a version of Windows 95 that does not have USB support, and you want USB support, Microsoft recommends that you upgrade to Windows 98 Second Edition.
NONE of those have the downloadable USBSUPP.EXE patch that turns OSR2 into OSR2.1, yet I have that patch archived on a CDR. The file exists. Microsoft is saying that to get USB support, you need Windows 98 Second Edition, which is bullshit, and is bad for the customer because Win98SE is much much slower than OSR2(and costs more money).
Additional OEM Information In Windows 95 OEM Service Release 2 (OSR2), 2.1 (OSR2.1) and 2.5 (OSR2.5), not all files have the version stamp that is listed in the table. In OSR2.1 and OSR2.5, only files that were updated to provide support for the Win32 Driver Model (WDM) and USB may have this version stamp (the other files have the same version stamps as the corresponding OSR2 files).
You can view file version information by right-clicking a file in Windows Explorer, clicking Properties on the menu that appears, and then clicking the Version tab. If there is no Version tab, there is no version information available for that file.
Updates to Windows 95 OEM OSR2 generally have a version of 4.00.1112 or later.
To determine whether you are running OSR2.1, check for "USB Supplement to OSR2" in the list of installed programs in the Add/Remove Programs tool in Control Panel, and check for version 4.03.1212 of the Ntkern.vxd file in the Windows\System\Vmm32 folder.
If you are running OSR2.5 and you uninstall the USB Supplement by using the Add/Remove Programs tool in Control Panel, the version number changes to 4.00.950b on the General tab in System properties.
NOTE: All versions of Microsoft Windows 98 include USB support.
Gee its really nice to tell me how to find out what version of windows I have, and if it has USB support, but nowhere does it say where to download USBSUPP.EXE to upgrade OSR2 to OSR2.1, which adds support for USB.
So Microsoft moving the DAC outside the pc and into the speaker itself is better? I'm not sure I follow. The signal is still being converted. Of course there are other things that are being put inside the pc that belong outside, such as DSL routers, not to mention the obliteration of hardware thats being emulated in windows-only software, at the same cost to the consumer (winmodems cost the same as real modems here).
I also know someone whose parallel port scanner still isnt supported in Windows 2000.
As of 2.2.15, the hedrick ide patches that add support for ata66 had not been merged. So you need to get a linux installation up and running, then patch the kernel and move the hd over to the ultra66, and edit fstab and lilo.conf to match.
As far as the above comments about other boot loaders overcoming the 1024 cyl barrier, the newest LILO version also overcomes it. There is also a way to get an unpatched kernel to read an ata66 connected hd, as outlined on http://www.linuxnewbie.org/nhf/intel/hardware/udma66.html.
Then again, I could be making an ass out of myself here - if it's because USB specs were unavailable to Linux programmers for the longest time, much like the undocumented BIOS function that limits Linux's RAM autodetection to 64MB, then by all means, tell me.
Word on the street is that Linux 2.4 uses the proper way to detect the amount of ram, hence no more APPEND MEM= crap. As far as USB has been around for five years(1995), well theres a hush-hush patch for Windows 95 called usbsupp.exe, I have yet to find it on www.microsoft.com/downloads, which updates the kernel to support USB, but you have to have Windows 95 OEM Service Release 2 (Win95b OSR2), which isn't for retail box sale. You must buy a new computer with it, or purchase it when you get a new hard disk. This is the same release that added FAT32 (the new 28 bit filesystem that allows for long filenames). This makes it near impossible for the normal user to actually have used USB (or FAT28^H^H32) prior to Windows 98,(the bugfix pack for Windows 95 that costs money for users who bought a Windows 95 License), without pirating OSR2. Talk about innovation.
I purchased an Ultra66 and it is Ultra fast, booting my system up in less than half the time as the dinky pio mode 4 ide channel on the isa all-in-one card. Throughput also went way up. It's a clear winner in Linux.
In NT4 however, on a clean install according to http://www.promise.com/tech support/Install/U66_NT40.htm, NT4 informs me that the device isn't in my system, despite the fact that I had just done some partitioning on the HD on that controller in DOS previously... hmm how about I install NT on a normal ide channel then add the Ultra66 driver? Ok. http://www.promise.com/techsupport/Install/u66_exisiting.htm steps me through it. When I add the driver in the SCSI Adapters part in control panel, power down, insert card, and reboot, NTDetect locks up tighter than a virgin at bible camp. Whoops. NT4 hasn't been able to run on it to this day, while Linux is flying along running my home network's file server with this controller, on the same hardware that stops NT cold in its tracks.
How is usb feasable? As far as I'm concerned, its not for me. A usb wheely mouse costs twice what a ps2 wheely mouse costs. That means fuck usb mice, I don't think usb is so cool that I'm willing to pay more for an interface that I don't even see, physically or 'performance' wise.
Usb network interface? Are you fucking kidding me? Keyboards... whatever, check the prices.
The sis6326 is supported in XFree86, hell you can even build the utah-glx module for 3.3.6 for it. I know, because everytime i cvs it i have to./autogen.sh --enable-extra --disable-sis6326 (among other things)
I am a Canadian living in BC, and I have a credit card in my name. I have ordered quite alot of stuff from the US, from thinkgeek, walnut creek, linuxmall, and some hardware sites. On your memorial day weekend, I placed an order for a k6-2 333 that would upgrade an old tired socket7 system. The cpu I found from pricewatch, and man it was a deal. The online order form even had zip/postal code and province/state options. Cool! Tuesday I got a call from a girl of oriental descent stating that "Credit card must be in US" Well since I'm Canadian living in Canada, thats going to be tough. "You can send money order".. wtf online ordering is cool because it is so fast and simple with a credit card. I tried to explain that the currency issues are handled transparently by my credit card and that I have ordered from the US before. No dice, I ended up cancelling the order.
Long answer: Intel claims ownership to the APIC SMP scheme, and unless a company licenses it from Intel they may not use it. There are currently no companies that have done so. (This of course can change in the future) FYI - Both Cyrix and AMD support the non-proprietary OpenPIC SMP standard but currently there are no motherboards that use it.
Slashdot Mirror
All the Windows kiddies have been ejaculating all over each other because the "Gold" release of Windows 98 Third Edition (ME) is being pirated as of June 23/00. It's not expected to hit the shelf until September.
Its nice to see someone else acknowledge this, the disk really does go crazy in Windows NT 2000, when it initializes the hd during the startup splash screen, I fear that the hard drive is going to fail it thrashes so much, and during login too.
I don't see how the Microsoft crowd can say this beast of an OS is faster than its 9x brothers. And this is on a 466 with 96mb ram too.
I'd be surprised if these Scientologists even knew how to work with sig figs.
Are all of slashdot's members Scientologists? There seems to be an awful tendency towards this conjecture.
This software is provided by the authors ``as is'' and any express or implied warranties, including, but not limited to, the implied warranties of merchantability and fitness for a partiticular purpose are disclaimed.
In no even shall the authors be liable for any direct, indirect, incidental, special, exemplary, or consequential damages (including but not limited to, procurement of substitute goods or services; loss of use, data, or profits; or business interruption) however caused and on any theory of liability, whether in contract, strict liability, or tort (including negligence or otherwise) arising in any way out of the use of this software, even if advised of the possibility of damage.
Red Hat also ships with lynx, arena, emacs...
I haven't used RedHat since 5.0 but you get the idea. They also are not polluting the operating environment with a browser, and they do not own the browser.
And Linux is not RedHat.
And you can download a Linux based operating system AND the browsers for free on the internet, as opposed to pirating Windows 98/2000 and/or downloading free(beer) IE5.
http://freshmeat.net/appind ex/1999/11/27/943756349.html
Explore2fs
John Newbigin - November 27th 1999, 21:32 EST
Explore2fs is a Windows program which allows read & write support for Linux filesystems, and works under NT, 95, 98 & 2000
Authentication to an NT domain over a tcpip network.
File formats for all the office programs.
Well, you can download ssh1 or ssh2 and its free for personal use, but I think its not free for commercial use, however 1.2.27 was totally free, and OpenSSH is what resulted. Its compatible with its commercial counterpart, and totally free. See where I'm going with this?
boot: Will there be a time when Linux won't be available for free?
Torvalds: No.
boot: You say that very quickly.
Torvalds: Yes. One of the reasons I say it quickly is I've been asked the question before, and I also have made certain there is no way anybody can take the freeness away. I very strongly feel that it's a good thing, and the copyright requires it. And when somebody sends me big patches, I don't ask them to assign the copyright over to me. So right now, for example, the kernel itself has probably on the order of 50 or 100 copyright holders and the actual copyright license has always been the same. It's the GPL that requires that sources always be available. So in order to make a version of Linux that is not under that license, you have to get all those copyright holders to agree to the new license. The parts of the kernel that I own completely are significant, but they aren't enough to really make a good system. I did that consciously. I wanted to bind my own hands so that even if people don't trust me personally, they trust the fact that even if I wanted to turn commercial, I couldn't.
Check out the interview, its pre 2.2 !
Thanks for the link, allow me to save the other readers having to click it, I'll extract the relevant parts right here.
1.Click Start, point to Settings, click Control Panel, and then double-click System.
2.Click the General tab.
3.Locate the version number under the System heading, and then see the following table.
Release Version File dates USB support Is USB support downloadable?*
Windows 95 retail 4.00.950 7/11/95 no no
Windows 95 retail SP1 4.00.950A 7/11/95 no no
OEM Service Release 1 4.00.950A 7/11/95 no no
OEM Service Release 2 4.00.1111 (4.00.950B) 8/24/96 no no
OEM Service Release 2.1 4.03.1212-1214 (4.00.950B) 8/24/96-8/27/97 yes n/a
OEM Service Release 2.5 4.03.1214 (4.00.950C) 8/24/96-11/18/97 yes n/a
*If you have a version of Windows 95 that does not have USB support, and you want USB support, Microsoft recommends that you upgrade to Windows 98 Second Edition.
NONE of those have the downloadable USBSUPP.EXE patch that turns OSR2 into OSR2.1, yet I have that patch archived on a CDR. The file exists. Microsoft is saying that to get USB support, you need Windows 98 Second Edition, which is bullshit, and is bad for the customer because Win98SE is much much slower than OSR2(and costs more money).
Additional OEM Information In Windows 95 OEM Service Release 2 (OSR2), 2.1 (OSR2.1) and 2.5 (OSR2.5), not all files have the version stamp that is listed in the table. In OSR2.1 and OSR2.5, only files that were updated to provide support for the Win32 Driver Model (WDM) and USB may have this version stamp (the other files have the same version stamps as the corresponding OSR2 files).
You can view file version information by right-clicking a file in Windows Explorer, clicking Properties on the menu that appears, and then clicking the Version tab. If there is no Version tab, there is no version information available for that file.
Updates to Windows 95 OEM OSR2 generally have a version of 4.00.1112 or later.
To determine whether you are running OSR2.1, check for "USB Supplement to OSR2" in the list of installed programs in the Add/Remove Programs tool in Control Panel, and check for version 4.03.1212 of the Ntkern.vxd file in the Windows\System\Vmm32 folder.
If you are running OSR2.5 and you uninstall the USB Supplement by using the Add/Remove Programs tool in Control Panel, the version number changes to 4.00.950b on the General tab in System properties.
NOTE: All versions of Microsoft Windows 98 include USB support.
Gee its really nice to tell me how to find out what version of windows I have, and if it has USB support, but nowhere does it say where to download USBSUPP.EXE to upgrade OSR2 to OSR2.1, which adds support for USB.
Last Reviewed: March 31, 2000
© 2000 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved. Terms of Use.
So Microsoft moving the DAC outside the pc and into the speaker itself is better? I'm not sure I follow. The signal is still being converted.
Of course there are other things that are being put inside the pc that belong outside, such as DSL routers, not to mention the obliteration of hardware thats being emulated in windows-only software, at the same cost to the consumer (winmodems cost the same as real modems here).
I also know someone whose parallel port scanner still isnt supported in Windows 2000.
As far as the above comments about other boot loaders overcoming the 1024 cyl barrier, the newest LILO version also overcomes it. There is also a way to get an unpatched kernel to read an ata66 connected hd, as outlined on http://www.linuxnewbie.org /nhf/intel/hardware/udma66.html.
I seriously doubt this yahoo is running any kind of Linux distribution if he says such things.
What he means when he says "give me a break" is "Give Microsoft a break", when I would rather "Break up Microsoft"
Word on the street is that Linux 2.4 uses the proper way to detect the amount of ram, hence no more APPEND MEM= crap.
As far as USB has been around for five years(1995), well theres a hush-hush patch for Windows 95 called usbsupp.exe, I have yet to find it on www.microsoft.com/downloads, which updates the kernel to support USB, but you have to have Windows 95 OEM Service Release 2 (Win95b OSR2), which isn't for retail box sale. You must buy a new computer with it, or purchase it when you get a new hard disk. This is the same release that added FAT32 (the new 28 bit filesystem that allows for long filenames).
This makes it near impossible for the normal user to actually have used USB (or FAT28^H^H32) prior to Windows 98,(the bugfix pack for Windows 95 that costs money for users who bought a Windows 95 License), without pirating OSR2. Talk about innovation.
In NT4 however, on a clean install according to http://www.promise.com/tech support/Install/U66_NT40.htm, NT4 informs me that the device isn't in my system, despite the fact that I had just done some partitioning on the HD on that controller in DOS previously... hmm how about I install NT on a normal ide channel then add the Ultra66 driver? Ok. /techsupport/Install/u66_exisiting.htm steps me through it. When I add the driver in the SCSI Adapters part in control panel, power down, insert card, and reboot, NTDetect locks up tighter than a virgin at bible camp. Whoops.
http://www.promise.com
NT4 hasn't been able to run on it to this day, while Linux is flying along running my home network's file server with this controller, on the same hardware that stops NT cold in its tracks.
How is usb feasable?
As far as I'm concerned, its not for me.
A usb wheely mouse costs twice what a ps2 wheely mouse costs. That means fuck usb mice, I don't think usb is so cool that I'm willing to pay more for an interface that I don't even see, physically or 'performance' wise.
Usb network interface? Are you fucking kidding me? Keyboards... whatever, check the prices.
"You ah oll sluts"*
-Conan the Barbarian
* = you are all sluts
I am suing Arnold now.
This would never happen in Canada.
What distribution are you using? I can't think of one that lets a regular user nuke /usr/lib/*
Or maybe you are using the root account for everything (snicker), this isn't Windows you know.
Utah-GLX: A hardware accelerated implementation of the GLX protocol
Supported Hardware
Matrox MGA-G200, MGA-G400
ATI RagePro (The Rage 128 family is not supported)
Intel i810
NVIDIA Riva series
SiS 6326
S3 ViRGE
The sis6326 is supported in XFree86, hell you can even build the utah-glx module for 3.3.6 for it. I know, because everytime i cvs it i have to ./autogen.sh --enable-extra --disable-sis6326 (among other things)
I got to do that on every Analytical Chemistry paper I wrote.
ANAL. CHEM.
I am a Canadian living in BC, and I have a credit card in my name. I have ordered quite alot of stuff from the US, from thinkgeek, walnut creek, linuxmall, and some hardware sites. On your memorial day weekend, I placed an order for a k6-2 333 that would upgrade an old tired socket7 system. The cpu I found from pricewatch, and man it was a deal. The online order form even had zip/postal code and province/state options. Cool!
Tuesday I got a call from a girl of oriental descent stating that "Credit card must be in US"
Well since I'm Canadian living in Canada, thats going to be tough. "You can send money order".. wtf online ordering is cool because it is so fast and simple with a credit card. I tried to explain that the currency issues are handled transparently by my credit card and that I have ordered from the US before. No dice, I ended up cancelling the order.
http://www.irisa.fr/prive /dmentre/smp-faq/smp-howto-3.html
3. x86 architecture specific questions
1.Can I use my Cyrix/AMD/non-Intel CPU in SMP?
Short answer: no.
Long answer: Intel claims ownership to the APIC SMP scheme, and unless a company licenses it from Intel they may not use it. There are currently no companies that have done so. (This of course can change in the future) FYI - Both Cyrix and AMD support the non-proprietary OpenPIC SMP standard but currently there are no motherboards that use it.
-That's right -- if you run Window2000, you're in front of it.
I think this means that Window2000 is in front of technology as far as being "in the way of" and "holding back progress".