>>You can buy laptops without an OS as mentioned above
Not from any of the major OEMs, and not at anything resembling their high-volume pricing.
Well, seeing that you want a one-off, custom installation you should expect to pay the one-off, custom price and not the "high-volume pricing". If you want the same price as a 10,000 unit bundle, simply call them up and negotiate a price for 10,000 laptops bundled however you want. Bet they'll give you a discount...
Yep. It's not a bad, somewhat portable, structured assembler but is just as dangerous as assembler and shouldn't be used where you wouldn't use assembler.
Then they got lucky in passing their exams since "what processor architectures does Windows NT run on" was an objective on the Windows NT exams as were topics on binary versus source compatibility.
Dave Cutler and his team from DECWest moved up the hill to Microsoft as a result of DEC killing their Prism project. (which is one of the biggest reasons DEC is now a department of the Compaq division of HP)
Also, Alpha was a great Windows machine. It ran Windows NT beautifully and what little software there was ran very well. It's interesting to note that you wouldn't have had trouble finding software for Alpha Windows NT if you'd been able to go with all Microsoft stuff. MS software was, for years, available in Alpha versions.
They also didn't want anything but Intel on their $5,000 Windows NT desktops, either.
Remember that Windows NT was available on:
x86
Alpha
PowerPC
MIPS
Clipper
and even with Microsoft investing large amounts of money and effort(Windows NT was written on MIPS and ported to x86 to make sure no x86isms crept in) in making the multiple platforms available NOBODY bought anything but the x86 versions in any numbers.
Re:The market frowns on Sun's 'monopoly potential'
on
Sun vs. OpenBSD?
·
· Score: 2
You'd think on a geek site like this that AND wouldn't be a difficult concept. I'd hate to see what gets done with XOR...
Re:Since "abductions" are really ...
on
Spielberg's Taken
·
· Score: 2
Close.
How about: by using Occam's Razor with the fact HSP is well-researched and documented, we can say with a reasonable degree of certainty that some reports of alien abductions are actually HSP.
Unless, of course, you've got a provable test methodology that is repeatable and something measurable to document the "anectdotal at best" statement.
Re:Since "abductions" are really ...
on
Spielberg's Taken
·
· Score: 2
No. There's a theory that abductions are hypnagogic sleep paralysis but to say it as an undeniable fact it just bad science tied to arrogance.
Actually, IBM was pretty damn sure that people needed 80386 systems. What they were also just as sure about was that an 80386 based PC would canibalize sales from their System/36 systems. The folks up in Rochester, Minnesota (where the System/36 and later AS/400 come from) went to Armonk (IBM Headquarters) and had the IBM Executive Committee block the 80386 based PC.
The industry stalled for a while because NOBODY had introduced anything for the PC compatible industry that wasn't a clone of IBM's systems or peripherals until then. Finally, Compaq risked the company with the DeskPro 386 and IBM was in serious trouble.
Also note that NT is only C2 rated when it isn't networked--not exactly a very useful rating, and something that exercises almost no multi-user capabilities.
You mean exactly the case for multiuser local protection that you say it doesn't have?
Wonderful excuses, by the way, for why Linux isn't certified as secure. "It really must be but nobody knows it. But it really is. Trust me..." On the other hand, a actually certified system isn't secure because you, personally, haven't seen enough people playing with it. Wow.
sigh Just when you think you don't need to hit preview one more time...
It should have read
StarOffice was NEVER intended to be a MSO killer, Sun always intended it to be a Java showcase...
Actually it was exactly intended to be a Microsoft Office killer. Sun expected Java to neutralize the advantages of the Intel/Microsoft architecture. The goal was to make Java universal and then get corporate users switched over to dumb Java terminals attached to SUN mainframes running Oracle databases. This would end all those pesky Personal computers and return things back to a centralized architecture with control back with IT management rather than the users. And that would return the fat profits of the old Mainframe/Mini days of the 60s and 70s. You still see McNealy and Ellison dream of this in every speech they make. Luckily, some of us still remember white coat/glass house computing...
StarOffice was NEVER intended to be a MSO killer, Sun always intended it to be a Java showcase...
Actually it was exactly,/b> intended to be a Microsoft Office killer. Sun expected Java to neutralize the advantages of the Intel/Microsoft architecture. The goal was to make Java universal and then get corporate users switched over to dumb Java terminals attached to SUN mainframes running Oracle databases. This would end all those pesky Personal computers and return things back to a centralized architecture with control back with IT management rather than the users. And that would return the fat profits of the old Mainframe/Mini days of the 60s and 70s.
You still see McNealy and Ellison dream of this in every speech they make. Luckily, some of us still remember white coat/glass house computing...
All you've argued is that you've never used the multiuser capabilities of NT. Sorry that you've never used them but they are there. (And there's more to multiuser than just running dumb terminals)
As for security, Windows NT got a C2 security rating and was architected at the B level. Unix was not.
OK. That gave me a good laugh. Thank you.
Trusting Corporate Purchasing Officers to make intellegent decisions based on anything other than purchase and support costs? These people actually believe ROI and TCO numbers.
Re:I am not that worried
on
More on Longhorn
·
· Score: 4, Funny
You mean it isn't:
COMPANY: Does it run linux?
VENDOR: We include a TechRef so you can write your own drivers and install routines to run under linux. After that, if we like your work, we'll sell it back to you as part of our price for the upgrade to the next version
COMPANY: Wonderful. You're true followers of Open Source.
It was the cost of developing the Alpha CPU that did DEC in.
Nope. It was the lack of income that did DEC in. Blaming R&D is a weak excuse for what was really horrible management, marketing and sales.
If they'd had good sales and developed Alpha, Alpha would have given them a new generation of products to sell.
If they had there same lousy sales and no Alpha R&D costs they'd have died anyway from having nothing relevent to sell.
Of course, killing Prism didn't help much either since that left them with nothing new to sell years earlier.
Yes, NTFS has supported 16EB volumes since it came out 9 years ago. The difference is the word "EFFICIENTLY".
NTFS can work with huge volumes but when you get into multi-TB sizes the efficiency is not ideal. (A good optimization, really, for now but not in a decade).
What, you don't think people will HAVE to be certified to work on their new hardware/software monoply?[sic]
Seeing how MS hasn't ever done anything like this in the history of the MCSE program perhaps you're just engaging in paranoid fantasies.
Let's see. I've been able to do that with every Windows NT based OS since Windows NT 3.1 back in 1993.
But it's only been around for NINE YEARS so perhaps it's too soon for you to have heard about that.
Slashdot Mirror
>>You can buy laptops without an OS as mentioned above
Not from any of the major OEMs, and not at anything resembling their high-volume pricing.
Well, seeing that you want a one-off, custom installation you should expect to pay the one-off, custom price and not the "high-volume pricing". If you want the same price as a 10,000 unit bundle, simply call them up and negotiate a price for 10,000 laptops bundled however you want. Bet they'll give you a discount...
Well, sure, programmers as good as you and I and a tiny number of others are should but do we trust everyone to use assembler for everything?
Yep. It's not a bad, somewhat portable, structured assembler but is just as dangerous as assembler and shouldn't be used where you wouldn't use assembler.
Impossible. C, itself, is a bad habit.
Actually, it was originally "Shapeware" not "Shareware"
Then they got lucky in passing their exams since "what processor architectures does Windows NT run on" was an objective on the Windows NT exams as were topics on binary versus source compatibility.
Dave Cutler and his team from DECWest moved up the hill to Microsoft as a result of DEC killing their Prism project. (which is one of the biggest reasons DEC is now a department of the Compaq division of HP)
Also, Alpha was a great Windows machine. It ran Windows NT beautifully and what little software there was ran very well. It's interesting to note that you wouldn't have had trouble finding software for Alpha Windows NT if you'd been able to go with all Microsoft stuff. MS software was, for years, available in Alpha versions.
Remember that Windows NT was available on:
- x86
- Alpha
- PowerPC
- MIPS
- Clipper
and even with Microsoft investing large amounts of money and effort(Windows NT was written on MIPS and ported to x86 to make sure no x86isms crept in) in making the multiple platforms available NOBODY bought anything but the x86 versions in any numbers.You'd think on a geek site like this that AND wouldn't be a difficult concept. I'd hate to see what gets done with XOR...
Close.
How about: by using Occam's Razor with the fact HSP is well-researched and documented, we can say with a reasonable degree of certainty that some reports of alien abductions are actually HSP.
Unless, of course, you've got a provable test methodology that is repeatable and something measurable to document the "anectdotal at best" statement.
No. There's a theory that abductions are hypnagogic sleep paralysis but to say it as an undeniable fact it just bad science tied to arrogance.
Actually, IBM was pretty damn sure that people needed 80386 systems. What they were also just as sure about was that an 80386 based PC would canibalize sales from their System/36 systems. The folks up in Rochester, Minnesota (where the System/36 and later AS/400 come from) went to Armonk (IBM Headquarters) and had the IBM Executive Committee block the 80386 based PC.
The industry stalled for a while because NOBODY had introduced anything for the PC compatible industry that wasn't a clone of IBM's systems or peripherals until then. Finally, Compaq risked the company with the DeskPro 386 and IBM was in serious trouble.
*O as released wasn't a Java app but it was intended that it would become one.
Also note that NT is only C2 rated when it isn't networked--not exactly a very useful rating, and something that exercises almost no multi-user capabilities.
You mean exactly the case for multiuser local protection that you say it doesn't have?
Wonderful excuses, by the way, for why Linux isn't certified as secure. "It really must be but nobody knows it. But it really is. Trust me..." On the other hand, a actually certified system isn't secure because you, personally, haven't seen enough people playing with it. Wow.
sigh Just when you think you don't need to hit preview one more time... It should have read
StarOffice was NEVER intended to be a MSO killer, Sun always intended it to be a Java showcase...
Actually it was exactly intended to be a Microsoft Office killer. Sun expected Java to neutralize the advantages of the Intel/Microsoft architecture. The goal was to make Java universal and then get corporate users switched over to dumb Java terminals attached to SUN mainframes running Oracle databases. This would end all those pesky Personal computers and return things back to a centralized architecture with control back with IT management rather than the users. And that would return the fat profits of the old Mainframe/Mini days of the 60s and 70s. You still see McNealy and Ellison dream of this in every speech they make. Luckily, some of us still remember white coat/glass house computing...
StarOffice was NEVER intended to be a MSO killer, Sun always intended it to be a Java showcase...
Actually it was exactly,/b> intended to be a Microsoft Office killer. Sun expected Java to neutralize the advantages of the Intel/Microsoft architecture. The goal was to make Java universal and then get corporate users switched over to dumb Java terminals attached to SUN mainframes running Oracle databases. This would end all those pesky Personal computers and return things back to a centralized architecture with control back with IT management rather than the users. And that would return the fat profits of the old Mainframe/Mini days of the 60s and 70s. You still see McNealy and Ellison dream of this in every speech they make. Luckily, some of us still remember white coat/glass house computing...
All you've argued is that you've never used the multiuser capabilities of NT. Sorry that you've never used them but they are there. (And there's more to multiuser than just running dumb terminals) As for security, Windows NT got a C2 security rating and was architected at the B level. Unix was not.
AG stands for "Attorney General" and "Almost Governor"
Perhaps you should actually USE the system before anonymously posting your ignorance.
OK. That gave me a good laugh. Thank you. Trusting Corporate Purchasing Officers to make intellegent decisions based on anything other than purchase and support costs? These people actually believe ROI and TCO numbers.
You mean it isn't:
COMPANY: Does it run linux?
VENDOR: We include a TechRef so you can write your own drivers and install routines to run under linux. After that, if we like your work, we'll sell it back to you as part of our price for the upgrade to the next version
COMPANY: Wonderful. You're true followers of Open Source.
It was the cost of developing the Alpha CPU that did DEC in. Nope. It was the lack of income that did DEC in. Blaming R&D is a weak excuse for what was really horrible management, marketing and sales. If they'd had good sales and developed Alpha, Alpha would have given them a new generation of products to sell. If they had there same lousy sales and no Alpha R&D costs they'd have died anyway from having nothing relevent to sell. Of course, killing Prism didn't help much either since that left them with nothing new to sell years earlier.
Yes, NTFS has supported 16EB volumes since it came out 9 years ago. The difference is the word "EFFICIENTLY". NTFS can work with huge volumes but when you get into multi-TB sizes the efficiency is not ideal. (A good optimization, really, for now but not in a decade).
What, you don't think people will HAVE to be certified to work on their new hardware/software monoply?[sic] Seeing how MS hasn't ever done anything like this in the history of the MCSE program perhaps you're just engaging in paranoid fantasies.
Let's see. I've been able to do that with every Windows NT based OS since Windows NT 3.1 back in 1993. But it's only been around for NINE YEARS so perhaps it's too soon for you to have heard about that.