Almost all QOS issues are going to be a problem here - resilience for example (two NICs and a modem are nice, but I can't see "redundant power supply" written anywhere; or how about hardware support for RAID, even just mirroring). Also customisation/optimisation - nice that it does this automatically, but how easy is it to overide the automatic configuration (not an issue for many of the people who are buying these, but it will really limit there usefullness in big low-tech companies where you need to tie in with your corp-wan.
Redundant P/S would be nice. The data drive is an IDE backed up to another IDE, so IDE-RAID aside, true RAID isn't an option. But, being backed up to a hard drive (and the OS on solid state) does make for easy recovery's.
I'd assume, though it's not a given, that most settings are user-configurable.
I agree to a point. Windows 2000 Server actually leaves a great deal of that "Wizard" crap out (except for the opening login dialog, which you can quickly turn off for good). When push comes to shove, I find it easier to administer a Windows 2000 machine than a Linux one. That doesn't make it better, worse or indifferent - it's when the program second-guesses the operator, without letting the operator make the decision first, that bad things really happen.
I see your point, but you're wrong. (We have some lovely parting gifts for you, however.)
It's when the admin/operator doesn't know what the program is assuming or using for defaults that problems occur. You have to know the OS you administer, whether that be Linux, Windows, or BeOS. That means knowing what the defaults are (there's almost always a way to change it if you need to) and how to change them.
Windows is, source code modifications aside, almost as configurable as Linux. You just have to know how. Linux, for the most part, makes sure you know everything up front. Windows assumes that you don't know or don't care, but gives you ways to change it if you do. If you don't look for those ways, then it's your fault...not Windows'.
Good point. The same people who hate most of the automagic "wizards" in Microsoft products (myself included) are probably going to hate this design. Personally, I'd rather spend the extra 20 minutes setting it up manually -- and correctly -- than having to drill through all the menus wondering what it missed.
Additionally, I wonder what happens if you have identical devices on the network, like another DHCP server. Does this unit turn off its DHCP server? Attempt to "take over" DHCP responsibilities (had this happen with a wireless access point once -- nasty results)?
Of course, me and you (and most other/.ers) could build a similar system, using Linux, without too much difficulty. But the 20 person law firm I just set up with a Windows 2000 server could not. The reason they wanted Win2k? Because they felt that they could, if needed, administer it. Of course, I know that's bunk, and that the only administering they're going to be doing is changing tapes...or breaking something.
This IMASS would be great for small businesses that just need basic file and print sharing (what we used to use Netware for). As a bonus, it can do DNS, DHCP, dial-up, etc. Sure, a Pentium-133 with a FreeSCO disk will do similar, but a PHB can't set it up.
Good question on the DHCP server, though. I would think that the machine is configurable, both in the services it provides as well as in the options for those services. If you're using in a WAN/Remote type environment, then someone should know what they're doing and be able to configure it. If it's your only server in a small business environment, then it shouldn't need too much fussing, and you can cross your fingers and away we go.
Of course, on the downside, if this thing was ever heavily marketed, I could find myself un(der)employed. =)
The reason AMD labels Durons in MHz/GHz, and Athlon XP's in PR (Performance Ratings, a la Cyrix) is that Duron's, Celeron's, and PIII's all are very similar architecture wise. Therefore, a Duron 1.1GHz is about equal to a Celeron 1.1GHz which is about equal to a PIII 1.1GHz (cache and FSB speeds notwithstanding.)
Athlon's are being marketed against the PIV's however, and the PIV's have changed their architecture significantly. This has the effect of the PIV actually being slower at equivalent clock speeds. A PIII 2GHz would be faster, for most apps, than a PIV 2GHz. To counter this unfair MHz advantage, AMD came up with their PR numbers to show that Athlon XP's perfrom equivently to a higher rated PIV. Of course, once software is programmed to take advantage of the PIV's new architecture (rememebr when Pentium Pro's hit the scene?), I wonder if AMD will push those XP ratings down. =)
Shouldn't it be possible to run an audio wire to your stereo? Maybe you could borrow some Cat5 and use a pair off that. Or hell, for $269 I'll sell you a computer more than capable of pumping out MP3's that you can put right next to your stereo. And you can even hook it up to your LAN.
So this relativist (sorry, forgot which) goes up to Socrates and claims, "Whatever I think right is so." Socrates spits back, "But what if I don't think so?" The relativist modifies his statement - "Whatever I think right is so for me." Socrates thinks for a moment and retorts, "I think you're wrong."
That's dumb. I'd get a new philosphy professor if he can't come up with a logical argument against that. Though amusing, there's no value in that anecdote. Socrates has simply admitted to the fact that right and wrong are in your perception and judgment. Socrates thinks the relativist is wrong, and the relativist thinks Socrates is wrong. How we're any closer to a definitive answer escapes me....But then, I can get a real job, and don't have to teach Philosophy.
That used to be true...to an extent. Back in 1989, Ashton-Tate/MS SQL Server 1.0 was released for OS/2, which was a port of Sybase's Dataserver for UNIX. For the first versions, MS did the client side work, but Sybase was totally responsible for the engine.
MS took a more active role in the development after that, however. By 1991, MS and Sybase were both working on the engine and core features of SQL Server. MS then produced it's own version of SQL Server for NT in 93. This was a major rewrite, though feature-compatible with earlier Sybase/MS versions. In 94, MS and Sybase parted ways, and traded code.
95 saw MS-SQL Server 6.0, the 1st solely produced MS SQL Server (though, of course, Sybase's code was still in there). However, SQL Server 7.0's engine was almost totally rewritten by MS, and the current SQL Server 2000 is based on that engine. A quick history, with MS spin of course, can be found at MSDN. I know it's MS's PR, but the major events coincide with the known history of the product. Just ignore the marketing hyperbole.
Granted, I dont know if M$ works this way, and I seriously doubt it. I know for a fact that, given the correct support level agreement with MAJOR storage and UNIX vendors that it works like this. Granted, many places do not have the money to spend on this level of support, but the ones who do usually set the standards.
Microsoft has Windows 2000 Datacenter. Available only thru a system builder (eg., I think Compaq and HP are in the program...oh wait, they're the same now). And, yes, it works almost exactly like 'Big Iron' contracts. And costs almost as much to boot. But, it's Microsoft's push to take over the datacenter environment and mainframes. I don't think many have jumped on board, but TerraServer is a MS sponsored Datacenter cluster.
Microsoft® TerraServer images are managed by Microsoft SQL Server(TM) 2000 Enterprise Edition, the award-winning enterprise database server. The host environment is a four node, Windows® 2000 Data Center Edition cluster. Three nodes in the cluster are active and each support a 1.5 TB SQL Server 2000 database containing TerraServer imagery and meta-data. Compaq ProLiant 8500 8-way processors and Compaq StorageWorks ESA 12000 subsystems are the hardware platform.
Usage stats have a max of 2.5 million page views in a day, with 12+ million database queries, and 163GB of data transferred. Too bad the whole thing looks like a MS commercial....It's still an interesting application, though.
Might be true in most cases, but I'd say if you're running debian, #debian on openprojects does. Quite a few of the developers hang out there (at least they used to - haven't been there in ages).
That's one of the major issues with Linux support thru IRC and mailing lists. They may be there today, but what about next year? Or 5 years from now? I think it's pretty safe to say that Microsoft will be around in 5 years...I don't know if #debian will be.
True, MS may decide to retire support for the OS I'd be using, a la Win95, but they annoounce it well in advance, and, let's be honest, it's past time for both Win95 and Win98(SE) to be phased out! =)
Think of the last time your Windows machine was marketed with Navigator, Corel's office suite or StarOffice, etc.
You won't find anything like this from any other OEM, or even from any other dealer/retailer. CompUSA does carry software and hardware in addition to selling Windows machines, but the store, marketing, and the sales force is not organized to try and associate those other software and hardware products with the Windows computer itself.
I gather that neither one of you has ever seen the late-night infomercials from AS Seen on TV PC.com...with that blabbering idiot who wouldn't know what to do with a computer if his teleprompter went blank.
Seriously, though. They do market machines with Corel WP (lower end machines, some HP's even), Lotus SmartSuite (mainly IBM, who, of course, owns Lotus...), maybe even StarOffice (eMachines perhaps?) etc. And, there are areas where advertising is actually focused on what you can do with a PC. Dell not too long ago, was making specific PC's for specific tasks (well, marketing them for specific tasks). Want a home theater PC? Get the Dimension HTPC (or whatever)...It just doesn't go over that well...
IMHO, the VHS/Beta analogy doesn't apply to Microsoft. Apple played the role of Sony by retaining tight control of their hardware, while IBM played JVC by essentially giving their technology away so everybody and their brother cranked out PC clones. M$ was at the right place at the right time.,
In the SMB NOS market, it does. Novell was an entrenched player in that market, but was a PITA (not technically, but politically) to develop apps for. That's why Netware has always been a great file and print server, but could never keep up as an application server. MS's NT on the other hand, was a veritable free-for-all for developers, and encouraged lots of applications and device drivers (as a side note, this is one reason why NT is not as stable as Netware) ot be developed by 3rd parties. In the end, the greater selection of NT apps, and it's passable file and print serving capabilities, won the market, and Novell has been struggling ever since....
Too bad I hosted several websites, gaming servers, and ran an ISP from my DSL connection, anyway. Suckers...
If you're serious about this, then I just wanted to thank you for slowing down everybody's connections because you can't use a residential service for what it's meant to be for. If you want to run an ISP/large game server/busy web site/etc., then pay the money for a business line. It's crap like that puts these guys out of business and causes trouble for people running small servers (like I run a webserver to host my bookmarks and files that I need access to from remote locations...It hardly ever gets any hits and doesn't threaten bandwidth or the network...)
Anyway one thing I realised - the people you call at the phone company when your line goes down know NOTHING about networking... they're not trained to fix networking problems... they are trained to fix M$ system setup problems, nothing else - not only that but they are pretty obviously under great pressure to fix ALL tech support problems this way - when I finally got through to the 2nd level people who actually know what they were doing things came back in under 5 minutes. However it's also pretty obvious that these people don't work weekends.
Of course the phone jockey's don't know much about networking...why do you think they're making $6-$8 an hour? I'd say 90%-95% of the calls they get ARE problems with a customer's configuration.
I'd suggest you get an email or phone number for the NOC and use them. Don't ever bother them with stupid shit, but if you find a router that's misconfigured or a server that's down, they're usually pretty happy to hear about it. I tend to wait about an hour to let them find/work on it, and if there's no changes (ie., I can't tell from my end whether they're working on it) I'll phone them and let them know. If, however, I see a server going up/down, changing ip addresses, etc., then I figure they're working on it and will fix it as soon as they can.
Re:Little content, little meaning...
on
MS DOS: A Eulogy
·
· Score: 2
Yes, it's truly lovely. Ever had win2k die on you? The only solution I've found (since safe mode doesn't work about 7 times out of 10) is to boot to the CD (which most of the time involves changing your BIOS to do that); wait for the entire setup to load; get through the rather annoying setup which could REALLY use a "back" feature (I'm sure I'm not the only one who tries stuff to quickly after the 5 minutes of loading); and getting to a console, which takes even more time to load.
Put your Win2K CD in. Go to a CLI, and type winnt32/cmdcons That'll put the Recovery Console on your startup list in the boot.ini file. No more having to load from the CD.
Re:Little content, little meaning...
on
MS DOS: A Eulogy
·
· Score: 2
Still, I'd be willing to argue that the removal of legacy DOS functionality isn't always a good thing. You break functionality with code that used to run on previous MS Operating systems.
Good. There's not a single DOS app that should be run anymore. If you really need a DOS app, keep using DOS. Your app isn't supported anymore, why should your OS be?
Furthermore, I'd imagine everyone who's been working in computers for awhile has watched the Windows GUI break, and then need the command prompt to fix it.
3 answers. (1) DOS boot disk. (2) Linux boot disk. (3) Recovery console. There are many other methods to fix a hosed GUI available. With NTFS finally making headway on FAT32, DOS boot disks (without SysInternal's read/write DOS NTFS driver) will become useless.
Now on the other hand, this may be a plus. Microsoft might actually believe that Windows is stable enough that you don't need the DOS prompt anymore. Stability is always good. But even on the most stable platform in the world, I'd still rather not have something crippled from my operating system just because MS doesn't think I need it anymore.
This is insightful? +4?!? One of the main problems with Win9x is the lack of stability caused by legacy code! What do you think the #1 reason that NT/2000 are 10x more stable than 9x is? It's 16-bit code! It's the dreaded "system resources" that that backwards compatibility requires! If moving to a more stable platform breaks your copy of Wordstar (it probably won't...most apps perform admirably well under ntvdm) then you need a new word processor! Don't blame the OS for moving forward, blame yourself for not upgrading your apps but still think you should have all the functionality of a modern OS!
cmd.exe is NOT DOS. Let's not even get into the fact that even command.com isn't DOS either. cmd.exe, if you examine the header, you will find it to have the letters 'PE' in the header, signifying that it is a Win32 console application, rather than a DOS application.
cmd.exe is a Win32 console application that is designed to somewhat emulate DOS. But it is no more DOS than Wine is Windows.
And as for command.com, command.com is no more DOS than bash is Linux. command.com is a DOS application that gives you a shell to work in, much like bash, when compiled on Linux, is a Linux application that gives you a shell to work in. Sorry, I lied, we did get into it.:)
True, neither cmd.exe nor command.com are MS-DOS. Of course, neither is MS-DOS dead, since Win98 and WinMe are still alive (ie., supported by MS) and both are essentially running on DOS.
And I think the original point of both cmd.exe and command.com being available is that most/.'ers seem to be moaning the death of the CLI, not the OS. The CLI is alive and well, and actually seems to be getting more useful with the new MS OS's.
For what it's worth, I'll be glad to see DOS the OS go. It was a great fun in its time, but it's out lived its usefulness and is causing us many more problems than it is solving them. Keep either it or Linux on a boot disk for emergencies, but if I never have to explain to a customer the difference between EMS and XMS memory, and the 640k limit, I'll be a happy man. That, and the Win9x resource issues (a main problem in the stability of those systems) will be a distant memory are enough to wish DOS farewell.
Why should you plan for the heatsink to fall off? How many times have you had it happen to you that magically all those static-parts go flying....Sure, the heatsink/fan are held by a high-tension piece of metal - in 10 years of experience I have never seen this be an issue. There is the remote possibility that in shipping the heatsink/fan can become dislodged.
While I've never seen an otherwise stable machine's heatsink fall off, I use to work Dell Tech Support, and had probably 10 or so calls in a year with the heatsink, fan and/or processor coming loose in shipment. This was with Slot 1's, and most prevalent when they first came out. After a few months or so, they redesigned the supports to make it less likely.
I don't see this as an issue in normal circumstances, but if you're lugging your PC around to LAN parties or shipping it, pop it open and take a look when you get there....
Well, this was no fault of the AMD CPU, just the fault of the misinformed operator. You must have a board that has the ability to utilize the diode and also have the proper BIOS to facilitate a system shutdown in a high core temperature situation. Of course, making it work cooler now allows us to speed it up and make it work hotter later!"
And, from THG's article, it's stated that (a) only 2 motherboards were known, at the time, to contain that circuitry; (b) THG used one of those boards (from Siemens), and was assured "that the thermal protection circuitry is definitely working on their motherboard"; and, from Siemens' engineers that, (c) "the thermal diode of Palomino is unable to react quickly enough. Only 1 degree/s is what the thermal diode is able to handle."
I'd say, all in all, Tom was pretty accurate in his reporting on this. Assuming his board and CPU weren't out-of-spec faulty, and that Siemens' knows what they're talking about (which we have no reason to doubt, they did design the mboard logic to communicate with the CPU diode), my conclusion is that the diode didn't react quickly enough to shut down the system. Are the AthlonXP's and/or a different motherboard able to cope better? Perhaps...But the one THG used certainly wasn't.
And now we know one of the ways AMD cuts costs....It's a pretty unlikely scenario, IMO, but it deserves recognition at any rate....
Yeah, as soon as some readers alerted him to it. Then he added a PostScript (tm). Then, to avoid trashing his entire article and admitting he was too stupid to understand the very things he was complaining about (making him one of the "millions of Windows users who barely know what right-clicking is", he dismisses it as too hard.
So, in my mind this is definately a monopoly act. I'm sure Microsoft spends millions of dollars on usability testing on their OS (don't laugh). They know that novice users will never find that Open with dialog,
and probably wouldn't do anything with it even if they did find it, but are they going to change it to make it easier to use? Of course not.
You hit the nail on the head. A brain-dead monkey who can't figure out right-click certainly isn't going to be able to figure out what other program to use to open his files. So it's pointless to make it easier to access, which simply translates to easier to fsck up.
Come to think of it, why does Windows hide regedit? I mean, you gotta know the name of the command to run it! What the hell? It's obviously a ploy at monopolizing their feature settings! Their should be a big green icon on Regedit that says GO FOR IT!
It doesn't matter if it is easy. What matters is is it intuitive? What's Joe Schmoe going to do about the fact that when ever he opens a *.html file, IE opens. It works, he can see it. Who cares that he has Mozillia and Opera installed. ****He isn't even aware that there is a choice. ****
You're right, I don't get it. Explain to me how you'd make it "intuitive" for Joe User to realize a) that his file types are determined by an arcane and archaic 3 (or 4) letter extension, which is hidden from viewing by default, and b) that there's a huge database (the registry) that maintains info between the 3 (or 4) letter extension and his programs?
If you can't understand that, then it won't be intuitive. The best you can do is have the option in each program (which most do) to take over file types. In your example (Mozilla and Opera vs IE), Opera has a pretty easy way to go about it. File->Preferences->Default Browser. If the preferences/options for your chosen program isn't intuitive enough, I'm really not sure how Add/Remove programs would be!
I've had my IBM 75GXP drive for over a year, and have had no problems with it. I even stopped backing up my irreplaceable business and financial information 6 months ago because I've been so impressed with it! I don't know what you guys are complaidfj.AFSJGJfSZXCMdKJhvvf
Slashdot Mirror
Redundant P/S would be nice. The data drive is an IDE backed up to another IDE, so IDE-RAID aside, true RAID isn't an option. But, being backed up to a hard drive (and the OS on solid state) does make for easy recovery's.
I'd assume, though it's not a given, that most settings are user-configurable.
I see your point, but you're wrong. (We have some lovely parting gifts for you, however.)
It's when the admin/operator doesn't know what the program is assuming or using for defaults that problems occur. You have to know the OS you administer, whether that be Linux, Windows, or BeOS. That means knowing what the defaults are (there's almost always a way to change it if you need to) and how to change them.
Windows is, source code modifications aside, almost as configurable as Linux. You just have to know how. Linux, for the most part, makes sure you know everything up front. Windows assumes that you don't know or don't care, but gives you ways to change it if you do. If you don't look for those ways, then it's your fault...not Windows'.
Of course, me and you (and most other /.ers) could build a similar system, using Linux, without too much difficulty. But the 20 person law firm I just set up with a Windows 2000 server could not. The reason they wanted Win2k? Because they felt that they could, if needed, administer it. Of course, I know that's bunk, and that the only administering they're going to be doing is changing tapes...or breaking something.
This IMASS would be great for small businesses that just need basic file and print sharing (what we used to use Netware for). As a bonus, it can do DNS, DHCP, dial-up, etc. Sure, a Pentium-133 with a FreeSCO disk will do similar, but a PHB can't set it up.
Good question on the DHCP server, though. I would think that the machine is configurable, both in the services it provides as well as in the options for those services. If you're using in a WAN/Remote type environment, then someone should know what they're doing and be able to configure it. If it's your only server in a small business environment, then it shouldn't need too much fussing, and you can cross your fingers and away we go.
Of course, on the downside, if this thing was ever heavily marketed, I could find myself un(der)employed. =)
Athlon's are being marketed against the PIV's however, and the PIV's have changed their architecture significantly. This has the effect of the PIV actually being slower at equivalent clock speeds. A PIII 2GHz would be faster, for most apps, than a PIV 2GHz. To counter this unfair MHz advantage, AMD came up with their PR numbers to show that Athlon XP's perfrom equivently to a higher rated PIV. Of course, once software is programmed to take advantage of the PIV's new architecture (rememebr when Pentium Pro's hit the scene?), I wonder if AMD will push those XP ratings down. =)
Well, of course it was better than the chem tutorial! I've had BSOD's that were more fun than chem classes!
Shouldn't it be possible to run an audio wire to your stereo? Maybe you could borrow some Cat5 and use a pair off that. Or hell, for $269 I'll sell you a computer more than capable of pumping out MP3's that you can put right next to your stereo. And you can even hook it up to your LAN.
That's dumb. I'd get a new philosphy professor if he can't come up with a logical argument against that. Though amusing, there's no value in that anecdote. Socrates has simply admitted to the fact that right and wrong are in your perception and judgment. Socrates thinks the relativist is wrong, and the relativist thinks Socrates is wrong. How we're any closer to a definitive answer escapes me....But then, I can get a real job, and don't have to teach Philosophy.
MS took a more active role in the development after that, however. By 1991, MS and Sybase were both working on the engine and core features of SQL Server. MS then produced it's own version of SQL Server for NT in 93. This was a major rewrite, though feature-compatible with earlier Sybase/MS versions. In 94, MS and Sybase parted ways, and traded code.
95 saw MS-SQL Server 6.0, the 1st solely produced MS SQL Server (though, of course, Sybase's code was still in there). However, SQL Server 7.0's engine was almost totally rewritten by MS, and the current SQL Server 2000 is based on that engine. A quick history, with MS spin of course, can be found at MSDN. I know it's MS's PR, but the major events coincide with the known history of the product. Just ignore the marketing hyperbole.
Microsoft has Windows 2000 Datacenter. Available only thru a system builder (eg., I think Compaq and HP are in the program...oh wait, they're the same now). And, yes, it works almost exactly like 'Big Iron' contracts. And costs almost as much to boot. But, it's Microsoft's push to take over the datacenter environment and mainframes. I don't think many have jumped on board, but TerraServer is a MS sponsored Datacenter cluster.
Note: to be more specific,
Usage stats have a max of 2.5 million page views in a day, with 12+ million database queries, and 163GB of data transferred. Too bad the whole thing looks like a MS commercial....It's still an interesting application, though.
That's one of the major issues with Linux support thru IRC and mailing lists. They may be there today, but what about next year? Or 5 years from now? I think it's pretty safe to say that Microsoft will be around in 5 years...I don't know if #debian will be.
True, MS may decide to retire support for the OS I'd be using, a la Win95, but they annoounce it well in advance, and, let's be honest, it's past time for both Win95 and Win98(SE) to be phased out! =)
Just like a square is a rectangle, but a rectangle is not a square?
I believe the Jet engine is at the core of Access, but it's now known as MSDE, and is really a stripped version of MS-SQL Server.
You won't find anything like this from any other OEM, or even from any other dealer/retailer. CompUSA does carry software and hardware in addition to selling Windows machines, but the store, marketing, and the sales force is not organized to try and associate those other software and hardware products with the Windows computer itself.
I gather that neither one of you has ever seen the late-night infomercials from AS Seen on TV PC.com...with that blabbering idiot who wouldn't know what to do with a computer if his teleprompter went blank.
Seriously, though. They do market machines with Corel WP (lower end machines, some HP's even), Lotus SmartSuite (mainly IBM, who, of course, owns Lotus...), maybe even StarOffice (eMachines perhaps?) etc. And, there are areas where advertising is actually focused on what you can do with a PC. Dell not too long ago, was making specific PC's for specific tasks (well, marketing them for specific tasks). Want a home theater PC? Get the Dimension HTPC (or whatever)...It just doesn't go over that well...
In the SMB NOS market, it does. Novell was an entrenched player in that market, but was a PITA (not technically, but politically) to develop apps for. That's why Netware has always been a great file and print server, but could never keep up as an application server. MS's NT on the other hand, was a veritable free-for-all for developers, and encouraged lots of applications and device drivers (as a side note, this is one reason why NT is not as stable as Netware) ot be developed by 3rd parties. In the end, the greater selection of NT apps, and it's passable file and print serving capabilities, won the market, and Novell has been struggling ever since....
If you're serious about this, then I just wanted to thank you for slowing down everybody's connections because you can't use a residential service for what it's meant to be for. If you want to run an ISP/large game server/busy web site/etc., then pay the money for a business line. It's crap like that puts these guys out of business and causes trouble for people running small servers (like I run a webserver to host my bookmarks and files that I need access to from remote locations...It hardly ever gets any hits and doesn't threaten bandwidth or the network...)
Of course the phone jockey's don't know much about networking...why do you think they're making $6-$8 an hour? I'd say 90%-95% of the calls they get ARE problems with a customer's configuration.
I'd suggest you get an email or phone number for the NOC and use them. Don't ever bother them with stupid shit, but if you find a router that's misconfigured or a server that's down, they're usually pretty happy to hear about it. I tend to wait about an hour to let them find/work on it, and if there's no changes (ie., I can't tell from my end whether they're working on it) I'll phone them and let them know. If, however, I see a server going up/down, changing ip addresses, etc., then I figure they're working on it and will fix it as soon as they can.
Put your Win2K CD in. Go to a CLI, and type winnt32 /cmdcons That'll put the Recovery Console on your startup list in the boot.ini file. No more having to load from the CD.
Good. There's not a single DOS app that should be run anymore. If you really need a DOS app, keep using DOS. Your app isn't supported anymore, why should your OS be?
3 answers. (1) DOS boot disk. (2) Linux boot disk. (3) Recovery console. There are many other methods to fix a hosed GUI available. With NTFS finally making headway on FAT32, DOS boot disks (without SysInternal's read/write DOS NTFS driver) will become useless.
This is insightful? +4?!? One of the main problems with Win9x is the lack of stability caused by legacy code! What do you think the #1 reason that NT/2000 are 10x more stable than 9x is? It's 16-bit code! It's the dreaded "system resources" that that backwards compatibility requires! If moving to a more stable platform breaks your copy of Wordstar (it probably won't...most apps perform admirably well under ntvdm) then you need a new word processor! Don't blame the OS for moving forward, blame yourself for not upgrading your apps but still think you should have all the functionality of a modern OS!
True, neither cmd.exe nor command.com are MS-DOS. Of course, neither is MS-DOS dead, since Win98 and WinMe are still alive (ie., supported by MS) and both are essentially running on DOS.
And I think the original point of both cmd.exe and command.com being available is that most /.'ers seem to be moaning the death of the CLI, not the OS. The CLI is alive and well, and actually seems to be getting more useful with the new MS OS's.
For what it's worth, I'll be glad to see DOS the OS go. It was a great fun in its time, but it's out lived its usefulness and is causing us many more problems than it is solving them. Keep either it or Linux on a boot disk for emergencies, but if I never have to explain to a customer the difference between EMS and XMS memory, and the 640k limit, I'll be a happy man. That, and the Win9x resource issues (a main problem in the stability of those systems) will be a distant memory are enough to wish DOS farewell.
I still use echo foobar > foobar.txt on a regular basis....
While I've never seen an otherwise stable machine's heatsink fall off, I use to work Dell Tech Support, and had probably 10 or so calls in a year with the heatsink, fan and/or processor coming loose in shipment. This was with Slot 1's, and most prevalent when they first came out. After a few months or so, they redesigned the supports to make it less likely.
I don't see this as an issue in normal circumstances, but if you're lugging your PC around to LAN parties or shipping it, pop it open and take a look when you get there....
And, from THG's article, it's stated that (a) only 2 motherboards were known, at the time, to contain that circuitry; (b) THG used one of those boards (from Siemens), and was assured "that the thermal protection circuitry is definitely working on their motherboard"; and, from Siemens' engineers that, (c) "the thermal diode of Palomino is unable to react quickly enough. Only 1 degree/s is what the thermal diode is able to handle."
I'd say, all in all, Tom was pretty accurate in his reporting on this. Assuming his board and CPU weren't out-of-spec faulty, and that Siemens' knows what they're talking about (which we have no reason to doubt, they did design the mboard logic to communicate with the CPU diode), my conclusion is that the diode didn't react quickly enough to shut down the system. Are the AthlonXP's and/or a different motherboard able to cope better? Perhaps...But the one THG used certainly wasn't.
And now we know one of the ways AMD cuts costs....It's a pretty unlikely scenario, IMO, but it deserves recognition at any rate....
Yeah, as soon as some readers alerted him to it. Then he added a PostScript (tm). Then, to avoid trashing his entire article and admitting he was too stupid to understand the very things he was complaining about (making him one of the "millions of Windows users who barely know what right-clicking is", he dismisses it as too hard.
You hit the nail on the head. A brain-dead monkey who can't figure out right-click certainly isn't going to be able to figure out what other program to use to open his files. So it's pointless to make it easier to access, which simply translates to easier to fsck up.
Come to think of it, why does Windows hide regedit? I mean, you gotta know the name of the command to run it! What the hell? It's obviously a ploy at monopolizing their feature settings! Their should be a big green icon on Regedit that says GO FOR IT!
You're right, I don't get it. Explain to me how you'd make it "intuitive" for Joe User to realize a) that his file types are determined by an arcane and archaic 3 (or 4) letter extension, which is hidden from viewing by default, and b) that there's a huge database (the registry) that maintains info between the 3 (or 4) letter extension and his programs? If you can't understand that, then it won't be intuitive. The best you can do is have the option in each program (which most do) to take over file types. In your example (Mozilla and Opera vs IE), Opera has a pretty easy way to go about it. File->Preferences->Default Browser. If the preferences/options for your chosen program isn't intuitive enough, I'm really not sure how Add/Remove programs would be!
I've had my IBM 75GXP drive for over a year, and have had no problems with it. I even stopped backing up my irreplaceable business and financial information 6 months ago because I've been so impressed with it! I don't know what you guys are complaidfj .AFSJGJfSZXCMdKJhvvf
I/O ERROR DRIVE C: Abort, Retry, Fail?