I must suplement the usual flames of QBasic, one being it is an anagram for "Basic Queer." And further to GWBasic; being an anagram for "Basic Gay Women." GWBasic(wtf made this) and Microsoft QBasic have the stepping stones of being contendors of being at a gay disco dancefloor:
Does this have anything to do with Wendy Whitebread?
'cause I love Whitebread, does anyone else have some information on her career? I rather talk about a girl, instead of some other punk old man, because I'm not (a) HEMOS.
Wasn't/. the people that publicised the nVidia buyout of 3Dfx?
And then 2/3 of 3Dfx's developers moved to Absolute Power Graphics to sit and rot?
And ever since, we've still not seen a gfx chipset from Absolute Power Inc. for the past 2 years?
Perhaps nVidia knew 3Dfx developers would slashdot development of competing products, so nVidia bought them out, laid them all off, and knew they would all move to Absolute Power Inc and litteraly "slashdot" all development of nVidia's most patient competitor of which has most potential to make a "BANG" in the market...
Or maybe I have expelled enough methane already that I've evolved receptors to re-absorb it...saturating experience...I'll shutup now...
_DYNAMIC
_wash windows
_pooty
_spy4slashdot
_firstpost
steve
division by zero. core dumped
Hmmm... apparently the hidden objective C API they're talking about is "steve". My point exactly:
Is steve going to be the replacement to clippy? (you know, with a little happy computer guy, content with his Unix OS, and the more uptime you have his beard grows, and he is a speach ditizer interfaced to man, info, fortune, and/dev/random).
Great Idea. Hidden Objective C code everywhere. Go Steve!
MSDOS did not provide any form of multi-tasking. They implemented TSR's and those didn't qualify as multi-tasking because a TSR is a dead program in RAM waiting for stimuli. In essence, a beginning virus... TSR's are just part of the DOS driver FUD.
All things related to freeDOS; those who need info
on
FreeDOS
·
· Score: -1
freeDOS, yes, is GPL'd and aims to be MS-DOS compatible. freeDOS can be run inside Linux and BSD Unix using either BOCHS or DOSEMU. BOCHS offers more complexity and emulation of x86 platforms ontop of any computer platform, but is slower than DOSEMU. DOSEMU offers better performance, but is only available on x86 at the moment.
Q. Why is freeDOS compatible with specifically MS-DOS and not IBM PC-DOS, Calder Dr. DOS, or Novel DOS? A.Much of DOS's programs were built for MS-DOS specifications. Other DOS's may offer more features and performance, but have experienced difficulties in programs quitting with an eroneous error (ie Microsoft Windows 3.xx, etc., etc.). For compatability reasons, freeDOS must remain closely indistinguishable from MS-DOS.
Q. Can I play "my popular DOS game" in freeDOS? A.Yes, yes, all x86 DOS games will run. Actually, anything that is limited to text mode and SVGA will run. For example: The games I have run perfectly in DosEMU are Duke Nukem 3D/with TCP/IP multiplayer(and those darned fake Duke Nukems), Darklands, Rise of the Triad/with TCP/IP multiplayer, megapede, Dirty Harry, and nipples.
Q. What kind of performance should I expect in freeDOS when in BOCHS? Or DosEmu? A.Bochs is slow only because it is a true emulator; mimicking everying in an X86 computer starting from the dirt on up to the NE2000 NIC and SB16 soundcard. BOCHS can be used on any platform; which includes, but is not limited to Sparc, Alpha, MIPS, X86, PPC, and any others I forgot to mention. BOCHS requires DOS drivers to be loaded in freeDOS: ATAPI IDE CDROM, SoundBlaster 16, NE2000, TCP/IP, IPX, etc. DosEMU takes more of a Wine approach to running a DOS. Both BOCHS and DosEMU are not limited to freeDOS and can run any DOS in existance, but they go by it differently wherease DosEMU runs specifically anything in DOS and BOCHS can run Linux, freeBSD, BeOS, and any other x86 operating system. DosEMU translates DOS code onto the host computer and the DOS environment may interact with the environment of the host operating system. DosEMU realistically is the package that will give you the most security problems and the most performance. BOCHS is more correct, but lacking in performance; like comparing a sinking rock(BOCHS) to a balloon floating away.
Q. Are there any security risks of using freeDOS and if any, how do I optimize security in freeDOS? A.Just as DOS operating systems before freeDOS, a computer using freeDOS will be susceptible to all virii that ever existed in the DOS world. Once again, many of those virus updates and news flashes apply to you. freeDOS brings users back into the cold, insecure world of Microsoft software once again. Yes, you can install anti-virus software within your freeDOS "session", but it is likely you may have to search for a DOS-based Anti-Virus softwar package. Most Anti-Virus software is Microsoft Windows based, so you might be forced to use an older Anti-Virus package; such as Dr. Solomon's, Nortan Anti-Virus for DOS/Win311, or whatever that is old(pre-1999)...
Q. My name is Klerck, I eat dog poop, and I clean Bill Gate's Swimming Pool; where can I download a freeware Anti-Virus package or possibly where can I download Macafee for free? A.The only *freeware* Anti-Virus software released was from any given company that offered support for removing a specific virus from an already-infected computer. Your best chance is to look for an older DOS-based anti-virus package on an auction website or computer software discount center. You'll have better chances portscanning for anti-virus software in th 10.x.x.x subnet than anywhere else. It is verry likely that older Anti-Virus software will not screen today's virii, but at least it can screen virii that wanders through old DOS software that still tends to make its rounds in older computers, software, and floppy disks. In essence, MS-DOS and all later Microsoft Operating systems are too indistinguishable from virii. Why bother postpone the inevitable? If you don't like having to use Anti-Virus software then I suggest you clench your fist and petition the company of whose DOS software you still use and want to be ported to a more secure operating system such as Linux and freeBSD. That is the only solution against virii, move on like Microsoft wanted you to(I say move on to Unix).
Q.Why is everyone saying Linux is a communitst operating system? A.Linux is not a communist operating system. Linux's strengths are in running it's applications in a secure environment. It is an operating system available to anyone for free or buys from a "distribution." MICROSOFT makes everyone pay the same $130.00 to "rent" their operating system, tells people where they may and may not use their operating system, attempts to stifle and become incompatible with competition, and forces computer resellers to preinstall their operating system or risk losing the Microsoft-approved sticker. Linux gives you freedom of use of its operating system, starts you off with many good and fun free programs, has a vastly growing list of commercial software available, and backs-up this claim with the GNU Public License. Microsoft is the communist operating system; Microsoft cracks the whip on you and threaten you with financial destruction if you do not comply to their demands. Linux is liberty.
You go into either of the tricky side ramps meandering underneath where the BOSS is standing, turn and walk a couple steps deeper into the hidden area, shoot the wall at the end of the tunnel a couple times, and a secret passageway unclears where you are presented an art gallery of the programmers who worked on Quake2. Move all the way down to the end of the gallery, where Tim Willits' "spinning" portrait stands, and climb down the small passage next to it. Deeper you crawl and deeper you wonder what John Carmack and his pack of leeping lizzards poured into this game... You drop to the floor and gaze across an indoor, gothicly decorated, swimming pool of water and down its end you see three iron maiden strogg women and one strogg tank commander. What is wrong with this picture, you may ask? One strogg iron maiden woman is on the strogg tank commander's lap groping him and the other two are groping his ankles. Meanwhile, two mentally ill marines are in front of him dancing and slapping the floor with their hands and heads.
Was it a creative expression? Whas it to take the game into a lesser environment and ruin the conclusion of the game's story-line? The Quake2 engine demonstrates some principles on the environment and how good Quake2 was designed, but some people just can't let go of this because, yes, Id Software does have a good sense of humor and, yes, people are applying their judgement on Id because other crooked game designer's perverted ideas have already lowered their expectations of a clean game with no blatent and hidden pornographic images. Some people expect Id software to throw dirt into their games, but digging deeper reveals some good, clean programmers do exist.
But I just can't understand why game programmers, no just Id Software, always call the enemy their "boss" ? Do you see a corelation?
"Hey Bobby, did you kill te Boss yes?"
I smell video game designers trying to light the virtual wick for everyone to KILL THEIR BOSS. C'mon guys, the job can't get any worse... Whether you are washing dishes, making pizza, fixing computers, or working on cars; you always have a BOSS to report back to and at least there will always be a way to pooch screw the police officers. LMAO!
"One Ice-Tee for a COP!"
"One Clean Dish of Pizza for a Politician!"
"One fixed transmission for a Lawyer!"
"One fixed computer for Garry Glitter!"
No matter where you work, it can't get any worse than working for HAZMAT, Fred's Flushy, or Dipper Dan.
I am thinkink I am responding to a troll, but I'll go for the gold and burn some Karma...
eTesting Labs Inc has found Windows XP to be overall the fastest version of the Windows operating system ever created for a wide range of desktop computing tasks.
That is an overstatement and is verry misleading. You cannot claim any operating system is `King of the Hill' under any one set of rules given by the agency responsible for benchmarking and releasing the results. According to you, Microsoft Windows XP performs greater than Linux. Is Microsoft Windows XP able to perform highest and retain stability and security like Linux? We don't see that from this agency and I predict we never will.
On average, Windows XP-based computers:
Score 36% higher than Linux Redhat on Business Winstone 2001. Score 77% higher than Linux Mandrake on Content Creation Winstone 2001. Perform equivalent to the record-setting speed of Windows 2000 Professional, even with the addition of extensive new productivity features.
I notice this is "On Average" performance. Do you choose not to release the results of differently loaded Microsoft Windows XP desktops? Were both benchmarks taken from equally enabled features on Microsoft Windows XP, RedHat Linux, and Mandrake Linux? I do not see anywhere in your data that defines the stress of a given Linux system. Microsoft Windows XP installed out of the box runs 10% of what all commercial Linux systems run installed out of the box. Did you mention this? No you didn't. You already have misled most people who are reading your post.
Windows XP is clearly superior to all versions of Linux in all key performance categories. Among the lab's findings:
Faster startup performance: Windows XP is on average 34% faster than Linux Mandrake and 27% faster than Redhat.
Better run-time performance: This measurement refers to the speed at which Windows XP performs tasks while your computer is running.
Improvements in Windows XP runtime performance are evident in application startup and time and resource management. For example, average application startup on Windows XP is 25% faster than Linux SuSE and equivalent to Caldera.
More misleading information from you. What features were enabled on those Linux systems? All Linux distributions default to enable a larger number of features than Microsoft Windows XP. It is evident that the agency that has released these benchmark results was not competant in equalizing the features in the few Linux distributions it chose to compare Windows XP with. Given the performance of un-tuned Linux with Microsoft Windows XP, the Linux systems performed admirably well and at most efficiency with all of their features enabled. However, this is one giant misleading article and anyone who wants to witness the performance of tuned and un-hindered Linux should venture onward to www.linuxfromscratch.org because the LinuxFromScratch builing plan examplifies the processing power of Linux on equal terms of Microsoft Windows XP. WindowsXP defaults to enable verry few features and is not underload. LinuxFromScratch should compare perfectly with Windows XP.
Memory and Performance: In systems which include the recommended memory requirement of 128 megabytes of RAM, Windows XP is consistently superior to all versions of Linux.
Linux has a system recommendation 1 MegaByte of RAM or higher. Linux thus is more efficient with Memory and Performance. More power to your resource hungry applications, I say!
Windows XP offers dramatically faster startup and resume times, highly responsive applications, and other new features such as Fast User Switching and an enhanced user interface.
Another misleading statement from you. Linux has a verry small system requirement: you must have a working computer with at least 1 MegaByte of Memmory. Microsoft has always recommended a faster computer and more Memmory on each release of Windows. Thus, it is misleading that Microsoft Windows XP runs programs any faster than on Microsoft Windows 95. Microsoft Windows 95 recommended a computer with 16 MegaBytes of Memmory and Microsoft Windows XP recommends 128 MegaBytes of Memory. This difference in Memory recommendation justifies that Windows XP performs 35% better than Windows 95 with 16 MegaBytes of Memmory. The next test would be to make benchmarks between different version of Microsoft Windows equal and ethical by providing a single computer with 64MB of Memmory and testing all versions of Microsoft Windows on that same computer; the results are in and Windows XP is in fact slower than Microsoft Windows 95. As a side note on your benchmark results' correlation: Linux would perform 35% better than Microsoft Windows XP if only Linux had a recommendation of 256 MegaBytes of Memmory.
In Linux kernel series 2.0, there is better standards compliance and verry litte hardware optimisation. The 2.0 stage of Linux had less optimisation for hardware and interacted more with a computer's BIOS settings. Many Pentium Pro server motherboards had integrated Adaptect SCSI-2 controllers and support was broken from 2.2 to 2.4.9 releases of the Linux kernel. Linux kernel releases in the 2.0 series didn't have problems with the Adaptec SCSI-2's. Also of note, the Linux 2.0 series EIDE drivers never used DMA transfers and never exhibited the harddrive DMA timeouts and sync errors as expressed by 2.2 and 2.4 series Linux kernels. Many problems were on VIA MVP chipsets. Linux 2.0 was a golden age with 2.0.36 being the most stable kernel of all time. Many people began hearing of Linux' stability at the time of release of RedHat 5 and people flocked to eBay to buy it for $5 while others bought it immediately at their software retailer for $30.
People still use kernel 2.0 because they have no reason to upgrade. It's light on resources and is fast. RedHat 5 is one of the best Linux 2.0 kernel releases and is quite good IMHO. I and many other concious people don't like RedHat's software decisions in the 6 and 7 releases of their distributions. RedHat became sloppy on those and put more trust in eye candy and the latest compiler features than stability and compatibility. Many people that run x86 Virtual Machines from Linux have chosen to run multiple instances of RedHat 5. Many people still have RedHat 4 in their libraries! Kernel 2.0 was good and there is no excuse for later releases of both the kernel and RedHat to be so unstable and incompatible. The technology craze is beta and the Linux world shouldn't slump down to the level of beta. They should take it one step at a time like the BSD unix's. But hey, the kernel is all distributions can be recompiled and most people choose the beta features anyway. Can't blame anyone for that.
Isn't that called abstainance? Like I abstain from playing Microsoft Flight Simulator on Linux via WINE? You can't call WINE the digital Microsoft condomn yet... WINE(trojan) MAN!
Are they going to sell it to tuxgames or will they just do with it otherwise by giving it to the employees? This is the worsed day of Linux gaming history. Tustin isn't far from where I live and I bought only 5 of their games and all of which from Fry's Electronics. Loki didn't get much money from retailer sales as opposed to their online ordering from www.lokigames.com.
I wonder, will Loki opensource some of these games or will they go back to 100% ownership of the companies that originally created the games? Come to think of it, the list of games contains many titles that companies can no longer make good profit from. Will these companies absorb Loki's work as did ID software claiming Linux Quake3 to themselves?
This is a terrible day to hear this news. I'm going to see if they are still selling Mindrover, Rune, or Postal. In the worsed case, I hope Tuxgames buys from Loki all the games still in inventory.
Mind you that the Athlon XP 2000+ is operating at 1,666 MHz. I won't buy such a CPU because believe it to be something that only a(n) Anti-Christ would use. Unless, you like that kinda stuff.
The review results on Linuxhardware.org are a tad bit different from Tom's hardware, but benchmarks don't mean everything in term's of performance. For instance, why does a Pentium Pro 200MHz computer with only 550 MegaBytes per second L1 and L2 cache still outperform an Athlon on CAD software? Is it depending on optimization or quality of the CPU? Only the source will tell...
Their puzzle s fuckin' lame too. It's just some stupid million dollar mystery guess that some english teacher pulled out of her ass as she played with her mentally retarded children. May as well ask "Holy cowhole batman, what's green, skinny, and smells like diaper lint?" Of'course it's not the penguin...it's the riddler. Their puzzle is no different. It's completely illogical and I determine such by beaming aboard the bridge of the Enterprise and asking Spock. He said to me, "Affirmative, AnonymousCowheard, the Canadians' code is indeed illogical." So there, Spock agrees with me.
Slashdot has a code just like those canux's. What the hell does pater@slashdot.org mean? I think it means that CmdrTaxo, hemos, or timothy attended one of those canux's classes. Oh that's super... And to imagine what the canux teaches is a code and the battle.net protocol is not a code.
being the undisputed Linux distibution with the most bug fixes. Think of it RedHat's way and see their pain when they release 8.0 and it flops with bugs and incompatible optimizations. Well, look what the dog dragged in with the newspaper... An AOLinux CDROM with updated AOL network services, another free month of network access, and the good ol' RPMs and some Naughtilus friendly scripts to patch the bugs in RedHat 8. Rather than RedHat release successive versions of their OS, they can simply release an Uber version and everyone in your neighborhood will be bound with Linux updates. This is the best thing I see coming for Linux! It's better than Microsoft having people download all the huge service packs to be safe from harm.
Way to go AOL! (*cought*improve network performance*cough)
HP could embrace and extend Linux by implementing its own distribution of Linux and port the good handful of HP-UX programs, drivers, and phylosophy to this new Linux. Hell, or would you rather see them die off on yet another superb quality, but economically failing, and commercially ignored Unix platform? Linux breaths new life into all platforms and bridges their incompatibilities. Don't you remember that the goal of Linux is to make every computer out there able to run the same programs, achieve euphoria with cross-platform drivers, and support an over-all demanding consumer market? Enough with this x86/Microsoft FUD. When was the last time we all saw a virus in Linux software? Were they examples of exploits, profe of concepts? Can you actualy say there are Linux virii in the wild? Too many Indians [Unix flavors] and not enough chiefs [Linux]. (with respects to blackfoot, cherokee, seoul, and any other true Americans I may have offended; cheerfully I ask forgiveness).
I will no longer advocate their software because they have created such an abomination in their End User License Agreement. For them to even consider such agreements in their End User License Agreement, let alone write such abominations onto paper, is more than enough reason for me to not advocate their software.
I now envision and understand Borland/Inprise chooses to exist alongside Microsoft as such a company that tries to make me more of a slave everyday. From the bowels of my ass, I redirect ye Methane Gas towards the entities of Borland/Inprise and Microsoft and I choose to light a match; joyfully flaming them: engulfing them in a torturous mass of fire and fartstones.
...it reminds me of my pre-educated days, back when MS-DOS was around. I 0wnd MS Fortran, Microsoft MASM, Borland TASM, Borland TurboFUD C++ 3.0, Borland Turbo C++ 4.5 for Windows, and Wolfenstein and Doom were fUn.
What makes me wonder is that I own Borland Turbo C++ and even though it isn't isntalled, does that mean I already "agree" to the license of Borland just by 0wning it and keeping it stored in a box? Or is it just when it is installed on my computer?
Come to think about it, I better review all those old licenses and make sure Microsoft's, Novell's DOS, and Borland's EULAs aren't anywhere near the current license for Borland's current crap0la. This new EULA from Borland is enough for me to say that I will never, ever, purchase another product from them as long as I live. Their EULA for their Kylix and JBuilder state that I am their slave and I take none of that shit litely.
Ladies and Gentlemen, I invite you to the Annual Borland/Inprise Flame contest. Start your Linux engines and 3, 2, 1
Mandrake's current Linux release is verry unstable. I owned Mandrake 8 and myself and many other users have countless problems. Many of which have to do with compiling programs and running programs compiled by other people. Mandrake 8, I may add, is based on RedHat Linux 7, and so both have the same problems. RedHat and Mandrake chose a bad path for their company; they used some beta software and it is hurting people.
I provide tech support, in my free time, for the people at www.linuxquake.com/messageboard and 75% of the problems encountered on playing games are from users of Mandrake 8 and RedHat 7. If you want the most stable Linux environment, I suggest either Slackware Linux or SuSE Linux.
I recommend freeBSD to you because it is more stable than Linux in general, but I am a die-hard freedom fighter and Linux is what I chose of freeBSD simply because it is Free as in Beer.:) Have a nice day.
freeBSD is a verry stable desktop, with scheduled release dates and fewer security exploits and flaws. This accounts to a great user experience and a fast and stable desktop environment that is easy to use and troubleshoot in case of an error.
Linux is a verry stable desktop, with random unscheduled release dates, with growing security exploits and kernel FUD features and flaws, and honestly is becoming more bloated due to the insane thoughts of distributors. This accounts to a better user experience better than Microsoft Windows at the loss of stability, and a slow and well-balanced stable desktop on certain hardware criteria. Errors and software problems are more difficult to troubleshoot due to the nature of Linux distributors unable to agree upon filesystem primitives, but the end result is favorable to Linux for having the most potential and customizability for the end user with respects to the difficulties imposed by the particular distributor of your Linux.
With freeBSD, you are given a most stable operating system and environment. With Linux, you are provided software competitive to Microsoft and Apple, at the cost of stability, and offers you the possibility to customize your Linux and intentionally remove any nonsecure features to have a OS competitive with the stability of freeBSD.
To be honest, my hat goes off to freeBSD for being more stable than Linux, Microsoft, and Apple software. My hat goes off for Linux for being free, competitive on features with Microsoft and Apple, and offers the most customizability, excellent stability, and its codebase development is proven uncorruptable by any entity, corporation, or single political group; Linux is free and its development isn't centralized to where any of planet Earth's governments can impede or influence Linux' development. Microsoft and Apple are corrupted and freeBSD has the potential to be corrupted. I chose Linux simply because it's free, stable, and can be customized. For the business and corportate world, I would chose freeBSD as the best desktop operating system simply because of its proven stability; and we all want stability, right?
...would be to use the Dillo webbrowser as soon as it is combined with GNUwget to download files(which it doesn't yet do), with flasplayer to play Macromedia Shockwave flash scripts, and MPlayer to play the vast assortment of MultiMedia formats. How many people's Netscape browser uses "xanim" and the win32 dll's to view the various Microsoft multimedia video stream formats and also uses the commercial "mpegtv" for some good MPEG ability?
(...raises hand)
Well the "Dillo" webbrowser launches faster than a gassy turd pulled by gravity! It launches fast! It's the best X11/GTK+ Webbrowser for slow computers! It can't download other files intelligently yet, but I gave the author a hint to use a way of downloading files like the Ximian GNOME's native webbrowser, with an external program called "gtransfter" or "gtop"... I can't remember the name. So, that if for some reason the browser were to crash, the files being downloaded would not be stopped. So far, Netscape and Microsoft Internet Expl(or|oit)er will take file downloads with them as they crash. I remember I once tried downloading the LinuxQuake3 demo from ftp.cdrom.com about 7 months ago and Netscape crashed in the middle of the download! AIEEEEEEEEE! It was a big loss, so I did it again, taking about 90 minutes to download, and I got it perfectly and the next webpage I visited caused Netscape to crash. Lucky I got it in time, I guess...
Slashdot Mirror
Seek, Locate, Any, Double, Get, Access, $DATE, $TIME, Do, While, Using, Open, Bload, Put, Unlock, Chain, Log, Peek, Poke, Swap
But I'm thinking everyone is still high from your post and we all could probably find the same patterns of naming conventions on a can of spam.
'cause I love Whitebread, does anyone else have some information on her career? I rather talk about a girl, instead of some other punk old man, because I'm not (a) HEMOS.
And then 2/3 of 3Dfx's developers moved to Absolute Power Graphics to sit and rot?
And ever since, we've still not seen a gfx chipset from Absolute Power Inc. for the past 2 years?
Perhaps nVidia knew 3Dfx developers would slashdot development of competing products, so nVidia bought them out, laid them all off, and knew they would all move to Absolute Power Inc and litteraly "slashdot" all development of nVidia's most patient competitor of which has most potential to make a "BANG" in the market...
Or maybe I have expelled enough methane already that I've evolved receptors to re-absorb it...saturating experience...I'll shutup now...
Tried moving him, but he won't move and stay put.
function steve won't go away and doesn't stay in one spot.
function steve's beard is getting too big and desktop is becoming non-interlaced...
Hair everywhere! Steve interrupts my Unix Shell typing! Beard too big! Stupid Steve!!!
You're saying that Apple OSX developers have installed undocumented APIs in some of the libraries in the Mac OSX package? Can you elaborate? ...
What's that? strings /usr/lib/libstdc++-os10sumthin.so
_DYNAMIC
_wash windows
_pooty
_spy4slashdot
_firstpost
steve
division by zero. core dumped
Hmmm... apparently the hidden objective C API they're talking about is "steve". My point exactly:
Is steve going to be the replacement to clippy? (you know, with a little happy computer guy, content with his Unix OS, and the more uptime you have his beard grows, and he is a speach ditizer interfaced to man, info, fortune, and /dev/random).
Great Idea. Hidden Objective C code everywhere. Go Steve!
he's running against oscar meyer and ballpark.
MSDOS did not provide any form of multi-tasking. They implemented TSR's and those didn't qualify as multi-tasking because a TSR is a dead program in RAM waiting for stimuli. In essence, a beginning virus... TSR's are just part of the DOS driver FUD.
freeDOS, yes, is GPL'd and aims to be MS-DOS compatible. freeDOS can be run inside Linux and BSD Unix using either BOCHS or DOSEMU. BOCHS offers more complexity and emulation of x86 platforms ontop of any computer platform, but is slower than DOSEMU. DOSEMU offers better performance, but is only available on x86 at the moment.
/with TCP/IP multiplayer(and those darned fake Duke Nukems), Darklands, Rise of the Triad /with TCP/IP multiplayer, megapede, Dirty Harry, and nipples.
Q. Why is freeDOS compatible with specifically MS-DOS and not IBM PC-DOS, Calder Dr. DOS, or Novel DOS?
A. Much of DOS's programs were built for MS-DOS specifications. Other DOS's may offer more features and performance, but have experienced difficulties in programs quitting with an eroneous error (ie Microsoft Windows 3.xx, etc., etc.). For compatability reasons, freeDOS must remain closely indistinguishable from MS-DOS.
Q. Can I play "my popular DOS game" in freeDOS?
A. Yes, yes, all x86 DOS games will run. Actually, anything that is limited to text mode and SVGA will run. For example: The games I have run perfectly in DosEMU are Duke Nukem 3D
Q. What kind of performance should I expect in freeDOS when in BOCHS? Or DosEmu?
A. Bochs is slow only because it is a true emulator; mimicking everying in an X86 computer starting from the dirt on up to the NE2000 NIC and SB16 soundcard. BOCHS can be used on any platform; which includes, but is not limited to Sparc, Alpha, MIPS, X86, PPC, and any others I forgot to mention. BOCHS requires DOS drivers to be loaded in freeDOS: ATAPI IDE CDROM, SoundBlaster 16, NE2000, TCP/IP, IPX, etc. DosEMU takes more of a Wine approach to running a DOS. Both BOCHS and DosEMU are not limited to freeDOS and can run any DOS in existance, but they go by it differently wherease DosEMU runs specifically anything in DOS and BOCHS can run Linux, freeBSD, BeOS, and any other x86 operating system. DosEMU translates DOS code onto the host computer and the DOS environment may interact with the environment of the host operating system. DosEMU realistically is the package that will give you the most security problems and the most performance. BOCHS is more correct, but lacking in performance; like comparing a sinking rock(BOCHS) to a balloon floating away.
Q. Are there any security risks of using freeDOS and if any, how do I optimize security in freeDOS?
A. Just as DOS operating systems before freeDOS, a computer using freeDOS will be susceptible to all virii that ever existed in the DOS world. Once again, many of those virus updates and news flashes apply to you. freeDOS brings users back into the cold, insecure world of Microsoft software once again. Yes, you can install anti-virus software within your freeDOS "session", but it is likely you may have to search for a DOS-based Anti-Virus softwar package. Most Anti-Virus software is Microsoft Windows based, so you might be forced to use an older Anti-Virus package; such as Dr. Solomon's, Nortan Anti-Virus for DOS/Win311, or whatever that is old(pre-1999)...
Q. My name is Klerck, I eat dog poop, and I clean Bill Gate's Swimming Pool; where can I download a freeware Anti-Virus package or possibly where can I download Macafee for free?
A. The only *freeware* Anti-Virus software released was from any given company that offered support for removing a specific virus from an already-infected computer. Your best chance is to look for an older DOS-based anti-virus package on an auction website or computer software discount center. You'll have better chances portscanning for anti-virus software in th 10.x.x.x subnet than anywhere else. It is verry likely that older Anti-Virus software will not screen today's virii, but at least it can screen virii that wanders through old DOS software that still tends to make its rounds in older computers, software, and floppy disks. In essence, MS-DOS and all later Microsoft Operating systems are too indistinguishable from virii. Why bother postpone the inevitable? If you don't like having to use Anti-Virus software then I suggest you clench your fist and petition the company of whose DOS software you still use and want to be ported to a more secure operating system such as Linux and freeBSD. That is the only solution against virii, move on like Microsoft wanted you to(I say move on to Unix).
Q.Why is everyone saying Linux is a communitst operating system?
A. Linux is not a communist operating system. Linux's strengths are in running it's applications in a secure environment. It is an operating system available to anyone for free or buys from a "distribution." MICROSOFT makes everyone pay the same $130.00 to "rent" their operating system, tells people where they may and may not use their operating system, attempts to stifle and become incompatible with competition, and forces computer resellers to preinstall their operating system or risk losing the Microsoft-approved sticker. Linux gives you freedom of use of its operating system, starts you off with many good and fun free programs, has a vastly growing list of commercial software available, and backs-up this claim with the GNU Public License. Microsoft is the communist operating system; Microsoft cracks the whip on you and threaten you with financial destruction if you do not comply to their demands. Linux is liberty.
You go into either of the tricky side ramps meandering underneath where the BOSS is standing, turn and walk a couple steps deeper into the hidden area, shoot the wall at the end of the tunnel a couple times, and a secret passageway unclears where you are presented an art gallery of the programmers who worked on Quake2. Move all the way down to the end of the gallery, where Tim Willits' "spinning" portrait stands, and climb down the small passage next to it. Deeper you crawl and deeper you wonder what John Carmack and his pack of leeping lizzards poured into this game... You drop to the floor and gaze across an indoor, gothicly decorated, swimming pool of water and down its end you see three iron maiden strogg women and one strogg tank commander. What is wrong with this picture, you may ask? One strogg iron maiden woman is on the strogg tank commander's lap groping him and the other two are groping his ankles. Meanwhile, two mentally ill marines are in front of him dancing and slapping the floor with their hands and heads.
Was it a creative expression? Whas it to take the game into a lesser environment and ruin the conclusion of the game's story-line? The Quake2 engine demonstrates some principles on the environment and how good Quake2 was designed, but some people just can't let go of this because, yes, Id Software does have a good sense of humor and, yes, people are applying their judgement on Id because other crooked game designer's perverted ideas have already lowered their expectations of a clean game with no blatent and hidden pornographic images. Some people expect Id software to throw dirt into their games, but digging deeper reveals some good, clean programmers do exist.
But I just can't understand why game programmers, no just Id Software, always call the enemy their "boss" ? Do you see a corelation?
"Hey Bobby, did you kill te Boss yes?"
I smell video game designers trying to light the virtual wick for everyone to KILL THEIR BOSS. C'mon guys, the job can't get any worse... Whether you are washing dishes, making pizza, fixing computers, or working on cars; you always have a BOSS to report back to and at least there will always be a way to pooch screw the police officers. LMAO!
"One Ice-Tee for a COP!"
"One Clean Dish of Pizza for a Politician!"
"One fixed transmission for a Lawyer!"
"One fixed computer for Garry Glitter!"
No matter where you work, it can't get any worse than working for HAZMAT, Fred's Flushy, or Dipper Dan.
I am thinkink I am responding to a troll, but I'll go for the gold and burn some Karma...
eTesting Labs Inc has found Windows XP to be overall the fastest version of the Windows operating system ever created for a wide range of desktop computing tasks.
That is an overstatement and is verry misleading. You cannot claim any operating system is `King of the Hill' under any one set of rules given by the agency responsible for benchmarking and releasing the results. According to you, Microsoft Windows XP performs greater than Linux. Is Microsoft Windows XP able to perform highest and retain stability and security like Linux? We don't see that from this agency and I predict we never will.
On average, Windows XP-based computers: Score 36% higher than Linux Redhat on Business Winstone 2001. Score 77% higher than Linux Mandrake on Content Creation Winstone 2001. Perform equivalent to the record-setting speed of Windows 2000 Professional, even with the addition of extensive new productivity features.
I notice this is "On Average" performance. Do you choose not to release the results of differently loaded Microsoft Windows XP desktops? Were both benchmarks taken from equally enabled features on Microsoft Windows XP, RedHat Linux, and Mandrake Linux? I do not see anywhere in your data that defines the stress of a given Linux system. Microsoft Windows XP installed out of the box runs 10% of what all commercial Linux systems run installed out of the box. Did you mention this? No you didn't. You already have misled most people who are reading your post.
Windows XP is clearly superior to all versions of Linux in all key performance categories. Among the lab's findings:
Faster startup performance: Windows XP is on average 34% faster than Linux Mandrake and 27% faster than Redhat.
Better run-time performance: This measurement refers to the speed at which Windows XP performs tasks while your computer is running.
Improvements in Windows XP runtime performance are evident in application startup and time and resource management. For example, average application startup on Windows XP is 25% faster than Linux SuSE and equivalent to Caldera.
More misleading information from you. What features were enabled on those Linux systems? All Linux distributions default to enable a larger number of features than Microsoft Windows XP. It is evident that the agency that has released these benchmark results was not competant in equalizing the features in the few Linux distributions it chose to compare Windows XP with. Given the performance of un-tuned Linux with Microsoft Windows XP, the Linux systems performed admirably well and at most efficiency with all of their features enabled. However, this is one giant misleading article and anyone who wants to witness the performance of tuned and un-hindered Linux should venture onward to www.linuxfromscratch.org because the LinuxFromScratch builing plan examplifies the processing power of Linux on equal terms of Microsoft Windows XP. WindowsXP defaults to enable verry few features and is not underload. LinuxFromScratch should compare perfectly with Windows XP.
Memory and Performance: In systems which include the recommended memory requirement of 128 megabytes of RAM, Windows XP is consistently superior to all versions of Linux.
Linux has a system recommendation 1 MegaByte of RAM or higher. Linux thus is more efficient with Memory and Performance. More power to your resource hungry applications, I say!
Windows XP offers dramatically faster startup and resume times, highly responsive applications, and other new features such as Fast User Switching and an enhanced user interface.
Another misleading statement from you. Linux has a verry small system requirement: you must have a working computer with at least 1 MegaByte of Memmory. Microsoft has always recommended a faster computer and more Memmory on each release of Windows. Thus, it is misleading that Microsoft Windows XP runs programs any faster than on Microsoft Windows 95. Microsoft Windows 95 recommended a computer with 16 MegaBytes of Memmory and Microsoft Windows XP recommends 128 MegaBytes of Memory. This difference in Memory recommendation justifies that Windows XP performs 35% better than Windows 95 with 16 MegaBytes of Memmory. The next test would be to make benchmarks between different version of Microsoft Windows equal and ethical by providing a single computer with 64MB of Memmory and testing all versions of Microsoft Windows on that same computer; the results are in and Windows XP is in fact slower than Microsoft Windows 95. As a side note on your benchmark results' correlation: Linux would perform 35% better than Microsoft Windows XP if only Linux had a recommendation of 256 MegaBytes of Memmory.
In Linux kernel series 2.0, there is better standards compliance and verry litte hardware optimisation. The 2.0 stage of Linux had less optimisation for hardware and interacted more with a computer's BIOS settings. Many Pentium Pro server motherboards had integrated Adaptect SCSI-2 controllers and support was broken from 2.2 to 2.4.9 releases of the Linux kernel. Linux kernel releases in the 2.0 series didn't have problems with the Adaptec SCSI-2's. Also of note, the Linux 2.0 series EIDE drivers never used DMA transfers and never exhibited the harddrive DMA timeouts and sync errors as expressed by 2.2 and 2.4 series Linux kernels. Many problems were on VIA MVP chipsets. Linux 2.0 was a golden age with 2.0.36 being the most stable kernel of all time. Many people began hearing of Linux' stability at the time of release of RedHat 5 and people flocked to eBay to buy it for $5 while others bought it immediately at their software retailer for $30.
People still use kernel 2.0 because they have no reason to upgrade. It's light on resources and is fast. RedHat 5 is one of the best Linux 2.0 kernel releases and is quite good IMHO. I and many other concious people don't like RedHat's software decisions in the 6 and 7 releases of their distributions. RedHat became sloppy on those and put more trust in eye candy and the latest compiler features than stability and compatibility. Many people that run x86 Virtual Machines from Linux have chosen to run multiple instances of RedHat 5. Many people still have RedHat 4 in their libraries! Kernel 2.0 was good and there is no excuse for later releases of both the kernel and RedHat to be so unstable and incompatible. The technology craze is beta and the Linux world shouldn't slump down to the level of beta. They should take it one step at a time like the BSD unix's. But hey, the kernel is all distributions can be recompiled and most people choose the beta features anyway. Can't blame anyone for that.
Isn't that called abstainance? Like I abstain from playing Microsoft Flight Simulator on Linux via WINE? You can't call WINE the digital Microsoft condomn yet... WINE(trojan) MAN!
Are they going to sell it to tuxgames or will they just do with it otherwise by giving it to the employees? This is the worsed day of Linux gaming history. Tustin isn't far from where I live and I bought only 5 of their games and all of which from Fry's Electronics. Loki didn't get much money from retailer sales as opposed to their online ordering from www.lokigames.com.
I wonder, will Loki opensource some of these games or will they go back to 100% ownership of the companies that originally created the games? Come to think of it, the list of games contains many titles that companies can no longer make good profit from. Will these companies absorb Loki's work as did ID software claiming Linux Quake3 to themselves?
This is a terrible day to hear this news. I'm going to see if they are still selling Mindrover, Rune, or Postal. In the worsed case, I hope Tuxgames buys from Loki all the games still in inventory.
Pentium 4/2200 vs. Athlon XP 2000+
Mind you that the Athlon XP 2000+ is operating at 1,666 MHz. I won't buy such a CPU because believe it to be something that only a(n) Anti-Christ would use. Unless, you like that kinda stuff.
The review results on Linuxhardware.org are a tad bit different from Tom's hardware, but benchmarks don't mean everything in term's of performance. For instance, why does a Pentium Pro 200MHz computer with only 550 MegaBytes per second L1 and L2 cache still outperform an Athlon on CAD software? Is it depending on optimization or quality of the CPU? Only the source will tell...
Their puzzle s fuckin' lame too. It's just some stupid million dollar mystery guess that some english teacher pulled out of her ass as she played with her mentally retarded children. May as well ask "Holy cowhole batman, what's green, skinny, and smells like diaper lint?" Of'course it's not the penguin...it's the riddler. Their puzzle is no different. It's completely illogical and I determine such by beaming aboard the bridge of the Enterprise and asking Spock. He said to me, "Affirmative, AnonymousCowheard, the Canadians' code is indeed illogical." So there, Spock agrees with me.
Slashdot has a code just like those canux's. What the hell does pater@slashdot.org mean? I think it means that CmdrTaxo, hemos, or timothy attended one of those canux's classes. Oh that's super... And to imagine what the canux teaches is a code and the battle.net protocol is not a code.
You want a code, crack this!
anotherkernel.org
I think it sounds good.
Way to go AOL! (*cought*improve network performance*cough)
HP could embrace and extend Linux by implementing its own distribution of Linux and port the good handful of HP-UX programs, drivers, and phylosophy to this new Linux. Hell, or would you rather see them die off on yet another superb quality, but economically failing, and commercially ignored Unix platform? Linux breaths new life into all platforms and bridges their incompatibilities. Don't you remember that the goal of Linux is to make every computer out there able to run the same programs, achieve euphoria with cross-platform drivers, and support an over-all demanding consumer market? Enough with this x86/Microsoft FUD. When was the last time we all saw a virus in Linux software? Were they examples of exploits, profe of concepts? Can you actualy say there are Linux virii in the wild? Too many Indians [Unix flavors] and not enough chiefs [Linux]. (with respects to blackfoot, cherokee, seoul, and any other true Americans I may have offended; cheerfully I ask forgiveness).
Camelot is a silly place...
Look at this picture from sourceforge!
I hope you see the emphasis of sourceforge.NET...and I mean the way they drew the picture: .NET. Yikers!
I now envision and understand Borland/Inprise chooses to exist alongside Microsoft as such a company that tries to make me more of a slave everyday. From the bowels of my ass, I redirect ye Methane Gas towards the entities of Borland/Inprise and Microsoft and I choose to light a match; joyfully flaming them: engulfing them in a torturous mass of fire and fartstones.
Let the flaming begin!
What makes me wonder is that I own Borland Turbo C++ and even though it isn't isntalled, does that mean I already "agree" to the license of Borland just by 0wning it and keeping it stored in a box? Or is it just when it is installed on my computer?
Come to think about it, I better review all those old licenses and make sure Microsoft's, Novell's DOS, and Borland's EULAs aren't anywhere near the current license for Borland's current crap0la. This new EULA from Borland is enough for me to say that I will never, ever, purchase another product from them as long as I live. Their EULA for their Kylix and JBuilder state that I am their slave and I take none of that shit litely.
Ladies and Gentlemen, I invite you to the Annual Borland/Inprise Flame contest. Start your Linux engines and 3, 2, 1
GOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
I provide tech support, in my free time, for the people at www.linuxquake.com/messageboard and 75% of the problems encountered on playing games are from users of Mandrake 8 and RedHat 7. If you want the most stable Linux environment, I suggest either Slackware Linux or SuSE Linux.
I recommend freeBSD to you because it is more stable than Linux in general, but I am a die-hard freedom fighter and Linux is what I chose of freeBSD simply because it is Free as in Beer. :) Have a nice day.
freeBSD is a verry stable desktop, with scheduled release dates and fewer security exploits and flaws. This accounts to a great user experience and a fast and stable desktop environment that is easy to use and troubleshoot in case of an error.
Linux is a verry stable desktop, with random unscheduled release dates, with growing security exploits and kernel FUD features and flaws, and honestly is becoming more bloated due to the insane thoughts of distributors. This accounts to a better user experience better than Microsoft Windows at the loss of stability, and a slow and well-balanced stable desktop on certain hardware criteria. Errors and software problems are more difficult to troubleshoot due to the nature of Linux distributors unable to agree upon filesystem primitives, but the end result is favorable to Linux for having the most potential and customizability for the end user with respects to the difficulties imposed by the particular distributor of your Linux.
With freeBSD, you are given a most stable operating system and environment. With Linux, you are provided software competitive to Microsoft and Apple, at the cost of stability, and offers you the possibility to customize your Linux and intentionally remove any nonsecure features to have a OS competitive with the stability of freeBSD.
To be honest, my hat goes off to freeBSD for being more stable than Linux, Microsoft, and Apple software. My hat goes off for Linux for being free, competitive on features with Microsoft and Apple, and offers the most customizability, excellent stability, and its codebase development is proven uncorruptable by any entity, corporation, or single political group; Linux is free and its development isn't centralized to where any of planet Earth's governments can impede or influence Linux' development. Microsoft and Apple are corrupted and freeBSD has the potential to be corrupted. I chose Linux simply because it's free, stable, and can be customized. For the business and corportate world, I would chose freeBSD as the best desktop operating system simply because of its proven stability; and we all want stability, right?
(...raises hand)
Well the "Dillo" webbrowser launches faster than a gassy turd pulled by gravity! It launches fast! It's the best X11/GTK+ Webbrowser for slow computers! It can't download other files intelligently yet, but I gave the author a hint to use a way of downloading files like the Ximian GNOME's native webbrowser, with an external program called "gtransfter" or "gtop"... I can't remember the name. So, that if for some reason the browser were to crash, the files being downloaded would not be stopped. So far, Netscape and Microsoft Internet Expl(or|oit)er will take file downloads with them as they crash. I remember I once tried downloading the LinuxQuake3 demo from ftp.cdrom.com about 7 months ago and Netscape crashed in the middle of the download! AIEEEEEEEEE! It was a big loss, so I did it again, taking about 90 minutes to download, and I got it perfectly and the next webpage I visited caused Netscape to crash. Lucky I got it in time, I guess...