Oops. Guess I'm thinking of the Apple-supplied Network Boot Disk, which gave you the ability to connect to an AppleShare server, which I generally did to do a network installation of the OS.
In fact, the clouds now clear and I'm certain that this is what I was thinking of. I did have a few floppies that could boot PCI PowerMacs with MacTools Pro.
I remember hating booting from the MacOS CD-ROM because it wouldn't let you mount AppleShare volumes. It was obviously read-only, which didn't work well with the AppleShare client at the time.
So thanks/. -- if I ever buy a Mac again, I'll look forward to being able to boot from a floppy.
The last Macs that could boot off of a floppy were the original x100 series Power Macintoshes (6100/60, 7100/66, 8100/80). When the speed-bumped Power Macs came out (66, 80, 100 respectively), you could no longer boot from any floppy disk. Trust me, I lived through it.
The workaround was to get an external SCSI Zip drive and boot from that. This was such an improvement in so many ways that it's not really a workaround:
Hook Zip drive to SCSI port.
Plug up Zip drive AC adapter.
Insert BadAssZipDisk with a full OS, OS install files, networking, Norton Utilities, etc., etc. (clue: this is the part where it stops being a workaround and becomes an enhanced solution.)
Turn on Mac.
Hold down delete-option-control-shift (DOCS for short) indicating that you didn't want to boot from the internal hard drive.
I've heard that the performance of the SunPCi card is questionable. Even if it was great, bear in mind that it takes up two PCI slots. In a three-slot Ultra 5, you have one PCI slot to put the SCSI back in or get a decent video card. Your choice, since you can't get both.
I think it's a nice idea to sell these for cheap, but $2000 isn't cheap anymore, and you certainly must make sure you Don't Believe The Hype.
I'd love to write to a full-featured, fully implemented spec, but until > 90% of any potential audience can view that work as I intended with their 100% compliant and ultra-predictable web browsers, I have to water it down or limp along with workarounds on a per-browser basis.
This product seems to want to take care of the second problem so you don't have the first problem.
Guess what? If you had heard that guy saying "You've Got Mail!" every time you used your computer in the past ten years, AOL would be the first thing you think of when you hear the phrase.
Using this, it seems like the best phrase would be "You have mail." As in, "There is some mail in your inbox of which I would like you to be aware."
But it could be argued that you don't "have" the mail until you login to AOL and read it. In this case, maybe it's best to use "You got mail." As in, "New mail has just arrived at in the inbox on your computer, by virtue of you logging in."
If your mind assumes the mail's been there for a while, then hearing "You got mail" when you log in sounds like slang. ("Yeeeh boyeee, you gotz phat mailzzz!") AOL probably wanted to avoid that.
I think that AOL just wanted a catchy, ambiguous phrase to make you happy that you decided to log in, but didn't assume much about the way you think about your e-mail. "You've got mail" does that pretty well, even if it is questionable grammar. Like the previous decade's "Think Different."
Of course, they may have never thought about it at all.
You'd lose. You'd do better to register it as a trademark, since your phrase is not a created work.
Even then, you'd lose. You can't show that your phrase would cause confusion among consumers in a common marketplace, or that you'd used it prior to AOL's use of the similar phrase "You've got mail."
Not that AOL wouldn't fight you "tooth and nail", which sounds suspiciously similar to...
I've been waiting since 1996 or so. I remember telling a boss that with the new CHRP/PREP architecture that would be available in "just a few more months", we could fill our student labs with PPC hardware and supply the users with MacOS, Windows NT, even Solaris on a few machines for certain departments. It'd be so great to have a single, common hardware platform to maintain. Blah blah blah.
Glad he wasn't paying attention.
There is a clear reason to buy a G4: To run Photoshop real fast. For a lot of Apple's customers, this is the difference between an eight hour workday and one of 10+ hours. I can appreciate that, and can totally understand their willingness to pay a premium for that ability.
Hopefully the new IBM motherboard spec will result in commodity PPC hardware for the tinkerers and home-built crowds who also happen to love Linux, but please don't bet the farm on it right now. I think you might be in danger of retreading my three-year old path. Let's just wait and see if anyone comes up with a compelling story there.
Slashdot is probably not the only place with a big fat link to http://www.php.net/version4 this morning. In fact, I've seen it three other places this morning, of the three sites I've visited.
Just because the term is "slashdotted" doesn't indicate that an appearance on this site automatically equals a dead server.
So chill. Or do you really need to deploy PHP4.0b1 before lunch?
Re:That's logical, but Apple's not.
on
MkLinux Not Dead
·
· Score: 1
I'd love to see a real linux port designed for NuBus Macs, but I am certainly not holding my breath.
Could it be that they don't want to pave the way for a direct comparison of Mac hardware against x86-based hardware? Could it be that they're worried about MacOS market share?
It could be those things, but I think it's much more likely that Apple generally just wants to ignore all the NuBus Power Macs. Just like I increasingly ignore mine. I guess they think that if you're the type who'd buy a $3500 7100/66 back in 1995, you're the type who'll buy a fancy new G3 today. (btw, I don't have that model and didn't pay nearly that much, thank goodness.)
Poor x100 series owners; we can't install a fast, up-to-date, actively supported Linux on our machines to breathe new life into them like the 486 crowd can.
You won't find one Windows 9x box at my company. The reason I have a P-II 300 laptop with 128MB RAM is that NT Workstation 4.0 is the corporate standard. Too bad I can't use SP4 because it bombs out the laptop, and I have to unplug the network cable at just the right time to reboot it without a hang.
But hey, it's a standard...
(BTW, it's worth the hassles. W9x is middleware for games, that's it.)
Slashdot Mirror
Oops. Guess I'm thinking of the Apple-supplied Network Boot Disk, which gave you the ability to connect to an AppleShare server, which I generally did to do a network installation of the OS.
/. -- if I ever buy a Mac again, I'll look forward to being able to boot from a floppy.
In fact, the clouds now clear and I'm certain that this is what I was thinking of. I did have a few floppies that could boot PCI PowerMacs with MacTools Pro.
I remember hating booting from the MacOS CD-ROM because it wouldn't let you mount AppleShare volumes. It was obviously read-only, which didn't work well with the AppleShare client at the time.
So thanks
Oops, maybe not.
(And my Zip drive won't work, either.)
The last Macs that could boot off of a floppy were the original x100 series Power Macintoshes (6100/60, 7100/66, 8100/80). When the speed-bumped Power Macs came out (66, 80, 100 respectively), you could no longer boot from any floppy disk. Trust me, I lived through it.
The workaround was to get an external SCSI Zip drive and boot from that. This was such an improvement in so many ways that it's not really a workaround:
Heady days, indeed.
I've heard that the performance of the SunPCi card is questionable. Even if it was great, bear in mind that it takes up two PCI slots. In a three-slot Ultra 5, you have one PCI slot to put the SCSI back in or get a decent video card. Your choice, since you can't get both.
I think it's a nice idea to sell these for cheap, but $2000 isn't cheap anymore, and you certainly must make sure you Don't Believe The Hype.
I'd love to write to a full-featured, fully implemented spec, but until > 90% of any potential audience can view that work as I intended with their 100% compliant and ultra-predictable web browsers, I have to water it down or limp along with workarounds on a per-browser basis.
This product seems to want to take care of the second problem so you don't have the first problem.
Right?
Guess what? If you had heard that guy saying "You've Got Mail!" every time you used your computer in the past ten years, AOL would be the first thing you think of when you hear the phrase.
Non-AOL users don't understand this, I think.
Use "have" when you hold possession of something:
"You have a red wagon."
Use "got" when you gain possession of something:
"You got a red wagon yesterday."
Using this, it seems like the best phrase would be "You have mail." As in, "There is some mail in your inbox of which I would like you to be aware."
But it could be argued that you don't "have" the mail until you login to AOL and read it. In this case, maybe it's best to use "You got mail." As in, "New mail has just arrived at in the inbox on your computer, by virtue of you logging in."
If your mind assumes the mail's been there for a while, then hearing "You got mail" when you log in sounds like slang. ("Yeeeh boyeee, you gotz phat mailzzz!") AOL probably wanted to avoid that.
I think that AOL just wanted a catchy, ambiguous phrase to make you happy that you decided to log in, but didn't assume much about the way you think about your e-mail. "You've got mail" does that pretty well, even if it is questionable grammar. Like the previous decade's "Think Different."
Of course, they may have never thought about it at all.
You'd lose. You'd do better to register it as a trademark, since your phrase is not a created work.
Even then, you'd lose. You can't show that your phrase would cause confusion among consumers in a common marketplace, or that you'd used it prior to AOL's use of the similar phrase "You've got mail."
Not that AOL wouldn't fight you "tooth and nail", which sounds suspiciously similar to...
-jm
I've been waiting since 1996 or so. I remember telling a boss that with the new CHRP/PREP architecture that would be available in "just a few more months", we could fill our student labs with PPC hardware and supply the users with MacOS, Windows NT, even Solaris on a few machines for certain departments. It'd be so great to have a single, common hardware platform to maintain. Blah blah blah.
Glad he wasn't paying attention.
There is a clear reason to buy a G4: To run Photoshop real fast. For a lot of Apple's customers, this is the difference between an eight hour workday and one of 10+ hours. I can appreciate that, and can totally understand their willingness to pay a premium for that ability.
Hopefully the new IBM motherboard spec will result in commodity PPC hardware for the tinkerers and home-built crowds who also happen to love Linux, but please don't bet the farm on it right now. I think you might be in danger of retreading my three-year old path. Let's just wait and see if anyone comes up with a compelling story there.
jm
Ummm, isn't that backwards?
Apple has mighty fine color matching software because they control the OS, computer, and (if you're doing it right) the monitor.
I can understand SGI wanting to get out of the OS business, but not to make their graphics software better.
At any rate, investment from SGI towards Linux can help in a few areas everyone says it's needed: CPU scalability and high-end (esp. 3D) graphics.
Just a thought...
Slashdot is probably not the only place with a big fat link to http://www.php.net/version4 this morning. In fact, I've seen it three other places this morning, of the three sites I've visited.
Just because the term is "slashdotted" doesn't indicate that an appearance on this site automatically equals a dead server.
So chill. Or do you really need to deploy PHP4.0b1 before lunch?
I'd love to see a real linux port designed for NuBus Macs, but I am certainly not holding my breath.
Could it be that they don't want to pave the way for a direct comparison of Mac hardware against x86-based hardware? Could it be that they're worried about MacOS market share?
It could be those things, but I think it's much more likely that Apple generally just wants to ignore all the NuBus Power Macs. Just like I increasingly ignore mine. I guess they think that if you're the type who'd buy a $3500 7100/66 back in 1995, you're the type who'll buy a fancy new G3 today. (btw, I don't have that model and didn't pay nearly that much, thank goodness.)
Poor x100 series owners; we can't install a fast, up-to-date, actively supported Linux on our machines to breathe new life into them like the 486 crowd can.
Oh well, guess it'll just stay turned off...
You won't find one Windows 9x box at my company. The reason I have a P-II 300 laptop with 128MB RAM is that NT Workstation 4.0 is the corporate standard. Too bad I can't use SP4 because it bombs out the laptop, and I have to unplug the network cable at just the right time to reboot it without a hang.
But hey, it's a standard...
(BTW, it's worth the hassles. W9x is middleware for games, that's it.)