Considering that the intention is to get you to upgrade every 18-24 months, you can happily buy a 1Ghz machine right now, and switch brands for the 2Ghz machines in a couple years. (Either way, a new MB, case, RAM, etc is probably inevitable.)
Saying AMD is a better buy right now makes sense. Saying it is always going to be a better buy doesn't.
You hit the nail right on the head -- Sledgehammer is a no pain-little gain upgrade for most people, where the "feature" is that you can run Windows 9x forever and have nice optimised "64-bit" video drivers and other bits here and there to improve your Quake numbers.
Meanwhile your nice "64-bit" chip is still cranking 16-bit code part of the time. AFAIK, Microsoft has not promised a native Sledgehammer port of Windows, nor has anyone promised application support. Meaning that "64-bit" here is more of a marketing feature (much like MMX and 3DNow) than anything else. Which makes sense because by-in-large AMDs channel seems to be consumer/home boxes.
Intel is taking a different marketing tact -- targetting Merced at people who need both 64-bit and some i386 compatiblity and are willing to pay thorugh the nose for it. Merced users will have the 4GB Ought To Be Enough For Anyone problem solved. The problem is that there have been many better 64-bit solutions out there for years, for those who really needed 64-bit, and meanwhile the 32-bit chips are scaling quite well.
OK, so AMD's 1999 design is cheaper and faster than Intel's 1995 design -- that makes sense.
But it does not follow that AMD's 1999 design will be cheaper and faster than Intel's 2001 design in the long run. It probably will be initially (the 1400Mhz models), but once you get into the 2Ghz+ speeds, you don't know and neither do I. AMD could fall on it's ass and so could Intel. Intel says that the Pentium4 is designed to go up to 8Ghz, it would be interesting to see what upper limit AMD has planned for.
As as a side note, anyone who wants to run Visicalc (for the IBM PC) right now can download it at http://www.bricklin.com/visicalc.htm.
I had VisiCalc for the Apple II also. In fact the only reason I have any clue what Excel 2000 or Gnumeric is supposed to do or why anyone would use a spreadsheet at all is because I read the VisiCalc manual back when I was 10 or whatever.
TUX is being developed by RedHat. It will never make it into "Apache" proper, but will make it into an upcoming RedHat product, and source will be available.
There is nothing inherently wrong with the OS model, there's something wrong with the priorities of some developers and some organizations.
One of those developers being Microsoft, of course. Look at any of their pre-2000 desktop software which did not work right in secured configurations. Or, the terrible "Exploit Air" sample site they shipped with IIS4.
Stuff like this cracks me up. TEN YEAR OLD SECURITY FLAW REDISCOVERED BY ME -- EVIL VENDOR WON'T FIX BECAUSE OF BACKWARD COMPATIBLITY.
I suppose it's good to remind people that NetBIOS is an ancient insecure system that was designed for isolated 30 computer LANs, but the fact that someone has written an 'exploit' is not news at all. (Though, it would be nice if MS/Vendors shipped this stuff disabled by default on machines targetted to home markets.)
So, this is a "the website of idiots", the people who reply to you are either "stupid" or "full of preconceptions", but yet you view Slashdot as some sort of vital experiment in democratic communication. On top of that you hold Signal 11, an admitted manipulator, up as "voice of reason". Ok...
Sounds more like you are arguing for a system of rule by the elite and the articulate over any form of participative form of governance, which is exactly what karma whoring, trolling, meta-trolling, and pompous posturing is in this little game of "world domination", and none of which will matter when the AOL Barbarians really come throught the gate here. (If they haven't already. It's hard to manipulate a bunch of ACs calling each other niggers.)
That would be OK if you were halfway elite and articulate yourself. Instead, your posting history seems to be a series of high noise/low signal outbursts of smugness and arrogance at best, and blubbering pseudotrolling at the worst ("X Sucks - It needs to be in the Kernel" indeed, at least the "philosophically flawed 19th century spirit of scientific determinism" has a nice ring to it). You don't seem to be accomplishing anything except letting your movtivation show through your posts (it feels good when an AC tells you to fuck off, doesn't it?), so enjoy your slashdot power wank, and don't let it really go to your head like Signal 11 did.
Anyway, I'm biting at your post only because I've reading Signal 11's posts for three years now, and despite all the redigested shit he's posted and his self-righteous crucified-for-karma attitude (which he is dead serious about BTW), I generally think he's an intelligent guy who for a while mastered the game theory of this place, but fell flat on his ass when the rules changed. The experiment abandoned him, he didn't abandon the experiment. If you want to troll by play Sig11's trollee, that's fine, the suit of a self-righteous 'slashbot' fits you well. Only problem, I'm not so sure if it fits slashdot well anymore. Good luck in the karma games.
It also doesn't understands well Javascripts on some pages I tried.
Mozilla's DOM implementation is incompatible with both NS4's proprietary model and also with some popular IE extentions to the W3C DOM (like document.all which is almost universal in IE scripting).
So, this is a feature, not a bug.
(Is Konqueror trying to implement a full DOM implementation, or are they just aiming for the NS3-style form Javascripts?)
Slightly better DOM and Javascript rendering than 4.72.
"Slightly"? Considering how horrid NS4 was in that department, that's damnation by faint praise.
And as far as speed goes, my take is that it is as fast or faster as IE5.5, and probably just a little slower than IE5.0. (This is a recent nightly on Windows 2000, PII-400, 256MB RAM.) The speed up on big nested table pages like Slashdot is especially noticible.
And I'm not a blind Mozilla advocate either. I was scoffing at the Slashdot folks who have been tell us that M7/M14/M16/etc were as good as NS4.x. But, now that they've started freezing the features and working on the stablity and speed, I'm really impressed. Memory requirements might be a little rough on an average home box, but if you've got the RAM, by all means, try it!
The future of Slashdot seems intricately bound up to the future of politics
You know, this is the exact attitude that Signal 11 was exploiting during his karma whore experiment. Wide-eyed folks like you who were always promoting "Slashdotting politics the way we Slashdot webservers" were/are easily exploited in a groupthink/popularity manipulation contest that Siggy played so well.
I'm not trying to be rude, but unless you yourself are playing that game right now, YHBT.
Actually, there was a company that reverse engineered the MacOS back in the 1980s. They sold a machine with a both a 386 and a 030 which could run either Mac or DOS programs.
They used another Windowing toolkit (Motif? GEM?), there was no Finder, and a few major applications (such as Excel) wouldn't run.
I wish I could remember the name of this beast -- a trip to the stacks of a library that got MacWeek and the like is probably necessary, because time on the web started in about 1997.
That's what sells in the high-end gaming market, anyway. Look at the "64-bit" videogame systems
Riight, and that's where I see Sledgehammer -- 64-bit as a stroke-of-genius marketing feature for the dick-sizers out there.
Either way, Merced will be in larger servers and maybe expensive workstations. AMD will be in home boxes, so maybe the different approach is warrented, and the comparison might be irrelevant. Won't stop the advocacy flamewars, though.
Holding up the horrific 16 to 32-bit transition debacle (as executed by Microsoft with Win9x) as a good idea seems a little odd, considering it's been 13 years since the 80386, and most users are still crunching 16-bit code on their PIIIs and K7s.
But, that's exactly what Sledgehammer is going to get you. No "64-bit" OSes (except for maybe Linux), but instead a bunch of small incremental "Accelerated for Sledgehammer" drivers and video games. And like, the 640K barrier before it, it's no real solution to the upcoming 4GB barrier ("ought to be enough for anyone", right?), which is the main reason you want a 64-bit chip to begin with.
My guess is that Intel learned their lesson from the not-yet-complete IA-32 transition, and wanted to put in small disincentives that would hurry the transition to IA-64. That and marketing Itanium OS support like hell to all major providers, including Sun, IBM, and DEC (although they all reconsidered and said no), as well as funding Linux development.
Microsoft might not be real happy about DivX, but they probaby aren't too unhappy about it either. After all, it has made their player #1 in the critical markets of porn and pirate movie delivery.
I thought OpenStep on Solaris was killed because it's goals were too similar to Java's, and of course Java was Invented Here, and OpenStep was Not.
As for "easier migration path to non-sun hardware", isn't that exactly what Java gives you? I think Sun is playing this smart in a Microsoft-dominated world and realizes that cross-platform technology is actually a easy migration path to Sun hardware, as long as they keep the hardware enticing.
Count yourself lucky that you can choose between DSL and Cable. I know very few people in the SF Bay Area that have had such a choice, and the market for home broadband here is probably considerably greater than other places.
The providers run nasty ads ripping the other guy's technology, but as a matter of implementation, it hasn't happened yet. By no means does your experience in one town make my statement a "blantent load of BS".
It's alarming that most of the people who have any opinion about DSL, have a negative one (see DSL Reports for one), and the positive opinions look suspiciously like stroturfers.
If that isn't a trollish statement, I don't know what is. Is the poster really trying to indicate that a minority of DSL users have a positive opinion about it? That this is an issue worthy of 'advocacy' and astroturfing?
Look, DSL has lots of known problems. Technological (distance limitations), Market structure (competing vendors that are supposed to be cooperating), and Organizational (too much demand, slipping deployment schedules). This leads to lots of pain and "bitch boards" like DSL Reports. Yeah, there are problems, but a vast majority of users can't be having them, could they?
On top of that, in most places in the US, cable and the telcos have an under-the-table non-compete agreement. Most people either get one or the other (or neither). That means that people don't really have choice in the matter and therefore have no interest in trying to promote one tech over the other.
When I got DSL, it almost went wrong when the installers miswired everything (fortunately the 'old vet' caught the f-up), and my ISP screwed up the billing. But, on the other hand, PacBell upgraded the CO equipment right before installation, and I get 1.1-1.5K speeds easy. Did I run out and tell everyone on DSL Reports? Did I feel the need to evangelize DSL over cable or 2400baud modems? No, I pretty much just got on with my life.
Actually Sun hardware is not even that expensive for thing that Intel systems can compete in. Price a 4 CPU Xeon system from a real vendor like Compaq or IBM, and you'll see that a 4 CPU Sun will be in the same ballpark (despite being 64-bit, etc).
Apple isn't really a monopoly supplier of PPC-based personal computers. They are a sole supplier. (Since IBM and Motorola themselves dropped out of the market.)
Ext2 sucks. I run Linux at home and if I used Ext2 not only would it be unreadable from W2K, it would also be unreadable from my windows95 partition. The thing is, we all have those MS-DOS tools that we would want to run on our Linux drives, but can't if you use ext2!
See how stupid that sounds? Obviously, you don't have to use non-FAT filesystems if you don't want to, but condemning something because it doesn't fit your particular lowest common denominator Win95 game box situation.
but at most places I worked, the C: was FAT while the raid drives were NTFS
Now imagine a Unix admin who installed the operating system on a partition with no file permissions and a file system known to be unstable. Wow, his Unix install would be almost as unstable as his Windows NT install!
I did NT admin for a long time (94-97), and I never understood why people used FAT OS partitions. You were bound to have a corrupted registry sooner or later. In a recovery situation, 9 times out of 10 DOS isn't going to help you, and you end up creating a parallel NT install so that you can mount the registry and fix whatever really went wrong, which is what you really should have done in the first place instead of messing with DOS.
You have confused NTFS (a file system) with SMB (a network protocol used for file+print). The Sun product does the same thing as Samba, and does not let you have access to local WinNT disks.
It's still an intersting story: The Sun product is based on a very old licence AT&T had from Microsoft for "LAN Manager for UNIX", which dates back to the OS/2 days when MS/IBM had no more than 10% of the File+Print marketshare. Now that WinNT is more popular, Microsoft wanted to breach the agreement, and AT&T had to sue them in order to get access to Windows 2000 source code so that they could make their product.
I thought the whole Open Source business model was "Sell the Support". It seems as if they are doing nothing more than that. Think of the word "port" as nothing more than something to mollify Mac users.
Tenon has been selling Unix-on-Mac environments for a long time. Now that the Mac IS Unix, they obviously need to adapt their business model. One way is to adapt their GUI configuration tools to help protect the poor Mac users from the scary BSD layer. The question is, will Apple just beat them too it?
Geez, I can see why the guy is bitter. He apparently makes a living trying to sell a Mac Quadra emulator for $200 (plus $100 for the ROM board). Meanwhile, anyone who actually wants to run old Mac software can get a REAL Quadra off EBay for less than $100.
He had some sharp software 8 years ago, but with 040 software out of production for so long, his revenue stream has to have dwindled to about nothing. (And this ain't just Apple dropping OS support -- every Mac software vendor has long ago dropped 68K software).
Meanwhile, his last great hope from going out of business, his PPC emulator, isn't working right. So, he lashes out. Pretty sad.
Slashdot Mirror
My point is that extrapolating is pointless.
Considering that the intention is to get you to upgrade every 18-24 months, you can happily buy a 1Ghz machine right now, and switch brands for the 2Ghz machines in a couple years. (Either way, a new MB, case, RAM, etc is probably inevitable.)
Saying AMD is a better buy right now makes sense. Saying it is always going to be a better buy doesn't.
You hit the nail right on the head -- Sledgehammer is a no pain-little gain upgrade for most people, where the "feature" is that you can run Windows 9x forever and have nice optimised "64-bit" video drivers and other bits here and there to improve your Quake numbers.
Meanwhile your nice "64-bit" chip is still cranking 16-bit code part of the time. AFAIK, Microsoft has not promised a native Sledgehammer port of Windows, nor has anyone promised application support. Meaning that "64-bit" here is more of a marketing feature (much like MMX and 3DNow) than anything else. Which makes sense because by-in-large AMDs channel seems to be consumer/home boxes.
Intel is taking a different marketing tact -- targetting Merced at people who need both 64-bit and some i386 compatiblity and are willing to pay thorugh the nose for it. Merced users will have the 4GB Ought To Be Enough For Anyone problem solved. The problem is that there have been many better 64-bit solutions out there for years, for those who really needed 64-bit, and meanwhile the 32-bit chips are scaling quite well.
OK, so AMD's 1999 design is cheaper and faster than Intel's 1995 design -- that makes sense.
But it does not follow that AMD's 1999 design will be cheaper and faster than Intel's 2001 design in the long run. It probably will be initially (the 1400Mhz models), but once you get into the 2Ghz+ speeds, you don't know and neither do I. AMD could fall on it's ass and so could Intel. Intel says that the Pentium4 is designed to go up to 8Ghz, it would be interesting to see what upper limit AMD has planned for.
As as a side note, anyone who wants to run Visicalc (for the IBM PC) right now can download it at http://www.bricklin.com/visicalc.htm.
I had VisiCalc for the Apple II also. In fact the only reason I have any clue what Excel 2000 or Gnumeric is supposed to do or why anyone would use a spreadsheet at all is because I read the VisiCalc manual back when I was 10 or whatever.
TUX is being developed by RedHat. It will never make it into "Apache" proper, but will make it into an upcoming RedHat product, and source will be available.
There is nothing inherently wrong with the OS model, there's something wrong with the priorities of some developers and some organizations.
One of those developers being Microsoft, of course. Look at any of their pre-2000 desktop software which did not work right in secured configurations. Or, the terrible "Exploit Air" sample site they shipped with IIS4.
Stuff like this cracks me up. TEN YEAR OLD SECURITY FLAW REDISCOVERED BY ME -- EVIL VENDOR WON'T FIX BECAUSE OF BACKWARD COMPATIBLITY.
I suppose it's good to remind people that NetBIOS is an ancient insecure system that was designed for isolated 30 computer LANs, but the fact that someone has written an 'exploit' is not news at all. (Though, it would be nice if MS/Vendors shipped this stuff disabled by default on machines targetted to home markets.)
So, this is a "the website of idiots", the people who reply to you are either "stupid" or "full of preconceptions", but yet you view Slashdot as some sort of vital experiment in democratic communication. On top of that you hold Signal 11, an admitted manipulator, up as "voice of reason". Ok...
Sounds more like you are arguing for a system of rule by the elite and the articulate over any form of participative form of governance, which is exactly what karma whoring, trolling, meta-trolling, and pompous posturing is in this little game of "world domination", and none of which will matter when the AOL Barbarians really come throught the gate here. (If they haven't already. It's hard to manipulate a bunch of ACs calling each other niggers.)
That would be OK if you were halfway elite and articulate yourself. Instead, your posting history seems to be a series of high noise/low signal outbursts of smugness and arrogance at best, and blubbering pseudotrolling at the worst ("X Sucks - It needs to be in the Kernel" indeed, at least the "philosophically flawed 19th century spirit of scientific determinism" has a nice ring to it). You don't seem to be accomplishing anything except letting your movtivation show through your posts (it feels good when an AC tells you to fuck off, doesn't it?), so enjoy your slashdot power wank, and don't let it really go to your head like Signal 11 did.
Anyway, I'm biting at your post only because I've reading Signal 11's posts for three years now, and despite all the redigested shit he's posted and his self-righteous crucified-for-karma attitude (which he is dead serious about BTW), I generally think he's an intelligent guy who for a while mastered the game theory of this place, but fell flat on his ass when the rules changed. The experiment abandoned him, he didn't abandon the experiment. If you want to troll by play Sig11's trollee, that's fine, the suit of a self-righteous 'slashbot' fits you well. Only problem, I'm not so sure if it fits slashdot well anymore. Good luck in the karma games.
It also doesn't understands well Javascripts on some pages I tried.
Mozilla's DOM implementation is incompatible with both NS4's proprietary model and also with some popular IE extentions to the W3C DOM (like document.all which is almost universal in IE scripting).
So, this is a feature, not a bug.
(Is Konqueror trying to implement a full DOM implementation, or are they just aiming for the NS3-style form Javascripts?)
Slightly better DOM and Javascript rendering than 4.72.
"Slightly"? Considering how horrid NS4 was in that department, that's damnation by faint praise.
And as far as speed goes, my take is that it is as fast or faster as IE5.5, and probably just a little slower than IE5.0. (This is a recent nightly on Windows 2000, PII-400, 256MB RAM.) The speed up on big nested table pages like Slashdot is especially noticible.
And I'm not a blind Mozilla advocate either. I was scoffing at the Slashdot folks who have been tell us that M7/M14/M16/etc were as good as NS4.x. But, now that they've started freezing the features and working on the stablity and speed, I'm really impressed. Memory requirements might be a little rough on an average home box, but if you've got the RAM, by all means, try it!
The future of Slashdot seems intricately bound up to the future of politics
You know, this is the exact attitude that Signal 11 was exploiting during his karma whore experiment. Wide-eyed folks like you who were always promoting "Slashdotting politics the way we Slashdot webservers" were/are easily exploited in a groupthink/popularity manipulation contest that Siggy played so well.
I'm not trying to be rude, but unless you yourself are playing that game right now, YHBT.
My understanding was that Laser didn't reuse ROMs -- they stole code from Apple's ROM. Which is how Apple successfully sued them out of business.
Actually, there was a company that reverse engineered the MacOS back in the 1980s. They sold a machine with a both a 386 and a 030 which could run either Mac or DOS programs.
They used another Windowing toolkit (Motif? GEM?), there was no Finder, and a few major applications (such as Excel) wouldn't run.
I wish I could remember the name of this beast -- a trip to the stacks of a library that got MacWeek and the like is probably necessary, because time on the web started in about 1997.
That's what sells in the high-end gaming market, anyway. Look at the "64-bit" videogame systems
Riight, and that's where I see Sledgehammer -- 64-bit as a stroke-of-genius marketing feature for the dick-sizers out there.
Either way, Merced will be in larger servers and maybe expensive workstations. AMD will be in home boxes, so maybe the different approach is warrented, and the comparison might be irrelevant. Won't stop the advocacy flamewars, though.
Holding up the horrific 16 to 32-bit transition debacle (as executed by Microsoft with Win9x) as a good idea seems a little odd, considering it's been 13 years since the 80386, and most users are still crunching 16-bit code on their PIIIs and K7s.
But, that's exactly what Sledgehammer is going to get you. No "64-bit" OSes (except for maybe Linux), but instead a bunch of small incremental "Accelerated for Sledgehammer" drivers and video games. And like, the 640K barrier before it, it's no real solution to the upcoming 4GB barrier ("ought to be enough for anyone", right?), which is the main reason you want a 64-bit chip to begin with.
My guess is that Intel learned their lesson from the not-yet-complete IA-32 transition, and wanted to put in small disincentives that would hurry the transition to IA-64. That and marketing Itanium OS support like hell to all major providers, including Sun, IBM, and DEC (although they all reconsidered and said no), as well as funding Linux development.
Microsoft might not be real happy about DivX, but they probaby aren't too unhappy about it either. After all, it has made their player #1 in the critical markets of porn and pirate movie delivery.
I thought OpenStep on Solaris was killed because it's goals were too similar to Java's, and of course Java was Invented Here, and OpenStep was Not.
As for "easier migration path to non-sun hardware", isn't that exactly what Java gives you? I think Sun is playing this smart in a Microsoft-dominated world and realizes that cross-platform technology is actually a easy migration path to Sun hardware, as long as they keep the hardware enticing.
Count yourself lucky that you can choose between DSL and Cable. I know very few people in the SF Bay Area that have had such a choice, and the market for home broadband here is probably considerably greater than other places.
The providers run nasty ads ripping the other guy's technology, but as a matter of implementation, it hasn't happened yet. By no means does your experience in one town make my statement a "blantent load of BS".
It's alarming that most of the people who have any opinion about DSL, have a negative one (see DSL Reports for one), and the positive opinions look suspiciously like stroturfers.
If that isn't a trollish statement, I don't know what is. Is the poster really trying to indicate that a minority of DSL users have a positive opinion about it? That this is an issue worthy of 'advocacy' and astroturfing?
Look, DSL has lots of known problems. Technological (distance limitations), Market structure (competing vendors that are supposed to be cooperating), and Organizational (too much demand, slipping deployment schedules). This leads to lots of pain and "bitch boards" like DSL Reports. Yeah, there are problems, but a vast majority of users can't be having them, could they?
On top of that, in most places in the US, cable and the telcos have an under-the-table non-compete agreement. Most people either get one or the other (or neither). That means that people don't really have choice in the matter and therefore have no interest in trying to promote one tech over the other.
When I got DSL, it almost went wrong when the installers miswired everything (fortunately the 'old vet' caught the f-up), and my ISP screwed up the billing. But, on the other hand, PacBell upgraded the CO equipment right before installation, and I get 1.1-1.5K speeds easy. Did I run out and tell everyone on DSL Reports? Did I feel the need to evangelize DSL over cable or 2400baud modems? No, I pretty much just got on with my life.
Actually Sun hardware is not even that expensive for thing that Intel systems can compete in. Price a 4 CPU Xeon system from a real vendor like Compaq or IBM, and you'll see that a 4 CPU Sun will be in the same ballpark (despite being 64-bit, etc).
Apple isn't really a monopoly supplier of PPC-based personal computers. They are a sole supplier. (Since IBM and Motorola themselves dropped out of the market.)
Ext2 sucks. I run Linux at home and if I used Ext2 not only would it be unreadable from W2K, it would also be unreadable from my windows95 partition. The thing is, we all have those MS-DOS tools that we would want to run on our Linux drives, but can't if you use ext2!
See how stupid that sounds? Obviously, you don't have to use non-FAT filesystems if you don't want to, but condemning something because it doesn't fit your particular lowest common denominator Win95 game box situation.
but at most places I worked, the C: was FAT while the raid drives were NTFS
Now imagine a Unix admin who installed the operating system on a partition with no file permissions and a file system known to be unstable. Wow, his Unix install would be almost as unstable as his Windows NT install!
I did NT admin for a long time (94-97), and I never understood why people used FAT OS partitions. You were bound to have a corrupted registry sooner or later. In a recovery situation, 9 times out of 10 DOS isn't going to help you, and you end up creating a parallel NT install so that you can mount the registry and fix whatever really went wrong, which is what you really should have done in the first place instead of messing with DOS.
You have confused NTFS (a file system) with SMB (a network protocol used for file+print). The Sun product does the same thing as Samba, and does not let you have access to local WinNT disks.
It's still an intersting story: The Sun product is based on a very old licence AT&T had from Microsoft for "LAN Manager for UNIX", which dates back to the OS/2 days when MS/IBM had no more than 10% of the File+Print marketshare. Now that WinNT is more popular, Microsoft wanted to breach the agreement, and AT&T had to sue them in order to get access to Windows 2000 source code so that they could make their product.
I thought the whole Open Source business model was "Sell the Support". It seems as if they are doing nothing more than that. Think of the word "port" as nothing more than something to mollify Mac users.
Tenon has been selling Unix-on-Mac environments for a long time. Now that the Mac IS Unix, they obviously need to adapt their business model. One way is to adapt their GUI configuration tools to help protect the poor Mac users from the scary BSD layer. The question is, will Apple just beat them too it?
Geez, I can see why the guy is bitter. He apparently makes a living trying to sell a Mac Quadra emulator for $200 (plus $100 for the ROM board). Meanwhile, anyone who actually wants to run old Mac software can get a REAL Quadra off EBay for less than $100.
He had some sharp software 8 years ago, but with 040 software out of production for so long, his revenue stream has to have dwindled to about nothing. (And this ain't just Apple dropping OS support -- every Mac software vendor has long ago dropped 68K software).
Meanwhile, his last great hope from going out of business, his PPC emulator, isn't working right. So, he lashes out. Pretty sad.