I happen to use Windows 98 SE and NT 4.0 on some of our lab machines.
As do a majority of notebook users, including myself. Geez, some/. readers (not you, the original poster) couldn't get more closed minded if they used duct tape.
That's nice... what about if you wanna use a PCI/ISA card? Maybe install one of those sweet 128MB video cards that you just can't get anywhere close to in a notebook?
Or how about a cheap SCSI card? PCI = cheap... PCMCIA != cheap
It's not so much that you need to port the application to 5 OS's, but simply that if the end user sees that it supports Win95 then they will probably assume it doesn't work on 98/NT/2000. Therefore to cover all grounds, they mention each version of Windows it will work on. Sort of like saying that a new module will only work with the latest 2.4 kernal, etc....
If I got this striaght.. UUNet. Sprint.. AT&T and the likes allow traffic from each other to freely flow over each others networks..
Just to clarify, UUNET a couple years ago broke off ALL peering agreements are they are now charging for any connections to their network. That the way it should be when you're the biggest one laying down all the infrastructure, and all the smaller guys just wanna ride you so they can make their own money.
Seriously, the present hard drive media has to go. It's the bottleneck of the entire system -and one of the few remaining moving parts in a computer. I'm looking foreward to the day when it's all solid-state.
That's just the point though... with one of these using your OS's standard SCSI drivers, you wouldn't need a classic hard drive. Why slow the system down by keeping in the old bottleneck?
As for why not just add more RAM to lower your swapfile, that's only good if you're using one of these SSD's for swap. What if you need fast access to disk based storage for things like video capture/editing? More RAM isn't gonna help you there, you need fast write/re-write disks.
Oh come down off your high horse! "trying to ban all communication, including normal speech"??? What a load! They are simply enforcing the campus network's AUP (acceptable use policy) which states that transfering illegal (as in copyrighted) material over campus networks is strictly forbidden. This has absolutely nothing to do with blocking free speech.
Ummm, these 15 people don't need to review EVERY line of code. That was all done in the development process by a whole lot more people. These 15 people are more like custodians who deal with security issues AFTER Windows2000 is released.
Slashdot Mirror
I happen to use Windows 98 SE and NT 4.0 on some of our lab machines.
/. readers (not you, the original poster) couldn't get more closed minded if they used duct tape.
As do a majority of notebook users, including myself. Geez, some
That's nice... what about if you wanna use a PCI/ISA card?
Maybe install one of those sweet 128MB video cards that you just can't get anywhere close to in a notebook?
Or how about a cheap SCSI card? PCI = cheap... PCMCIA != cheap
It's not so much that you need to port the application to 5 OS's, but simply that if the end user sees that it supports Win95 then they will probably assume it doesn't work on 98/NT/2000. Therefore to cover all grounds, they mention each version of Windows it will work on. Sort of like saying that a new module will only work with the latest 2.4 kernal, etc....
Do Windows SSH clients also support port redirection?
They sure do! My favorite is SecureCRT from Vandyke (http://www.vandyke.com)
Port redirection, scripting, and support for SSH1 and 2
Are you dense? Right in the /. article it says it's Open Source!
If I got this striaght.. UUNet. Sprint.. AT&T and the likes allow traffic from each other to freely flow over each others networks..
Just to clarify, UUNET a couple years ago broke off ALL peering agreements are they are now charging for any connections to their network. That the way it should be when you're the biggest one laying down all the infrastructure, and all the smaller guys just wanna ride you so they can make their own money.
Seriously, the present hard drive media has to go. It's the bottleneck of the entire system -and one of the few remaining moving parts in a computer. I'm looking foreward to the day when it's all solid-state.
That's just the point though... with one of these using your OS's standard SCSI drivers, you wouldn't need a classic hard drive.
Why slow the system down by keeping in the old bottleneck?
As for why not just add more RAM to lower your swapfile, that's only good if you're using one of these SSD's for swap. What if you need fast access to disk based storage for things like video capture/editing? More RAM isn't gonna help you there, you need fast write/re-write disks.
Ummm, it's already patched. Didn't you read the article?
That's funny, I don't remember ever seeing that posted from MS. Do you have the link to back up your claims?
Oh come down off your high horse! "trying to ban all communication, including normal speech"??? What a load! They are simply enforcing the campus network's AUP (acceptable use policy) which states that transfering illegal (as in copyrighted) material over campus networks is strictly forbidden. This has absolutely nothing to do with blocking free speech.
Ummm, these 15 people don't need to review EVERY line of code. That was all done in the development process by a whole lot more people. These 15 people are more like custodians who deal with security issues AFTER Windows2000 is released.