I still have a copy of that Corel Office for Java beta that they came out with. I remember how badly it ran back when it came out, but about a year ago I brought it up on modern equipment. It really wasn't that bad. It was clearly seven years too early to go anywhere.
Just for clarification, what is more DRM enabled about an Intel processor than an AMD processor?
I just want to know. I am not saying there isn't some detail that I am not aware of. Lately with unemployment I have been buying 'new' hardware mostly used off of eBay, and since there's so little AMD stuff out there (the market for AMD is far smaller, so the secondary market is smaller yet) I haven't fooled around with AMD stuff since my horrible mistake of buying a few K6 parts in the past.
The thing people forget is that OpenBSD is a much more tightly organized project than Linux or OSS in general. The OpenBSD developers are used to doing their work in a limited environment of reduced cost. The 'Image' of OpenBSD, i.e. the artwork, etc. has that kind of an aura about it (not meant at all as a put-down, more can often be done with less when the people involved are good at what they do).
The Red Hat organization was already getting crowded with the regular 'expense account' types by the time of their IPO. Obviously $2M wouldn't go far at that place.
The thing that really galls me about people who are strong, sometimes rabid, advocates of 'doing away with Legacy hardware' is that really, they're advocates of huge garbage landfills. It's fine to 'eliminate legacy design' if you're trying to sell new hardware in one or two year cycles to everybody. It's nuts if you're reasonable about what you spend and you want to incrementally upgrade to maintain your investment.
An excellent example of 'Legacy design practices' that work are the B-52 bombers. The airframes are almost always older than the pilots who fly them these days. The US Government probably couldn't afford to replace all the hardware we have long term investments in to keep the B-52 fleet running. And they shouldn't have to.
There do need to be 'breaks' with the past. Several significant breaks that I can think of in PC technology were the shift from the 'baby AT' to the ATX form factor for motherboards. The move from the 5-1/4" to 3-1/2" diskette and fixed disk drive footprint.
Finally, the organization that has Pissed me off the most when it comes to the 'anti-legacy' movement is Microsoft. They've for years advocated doing away with a number of legacy hardware features. I used to joke that the way to 'update' an older motherboard to be 'PC 2000' compliant (one of the Microsoft 'standards' they tried to impose for a vendor to get 'ready for Windows' labeling) was to use a side cutter to remove the serial, parallel, keyboard, and mouse ports, then fill the ISI slot board edge connectors with potting epoxy.
I'd certainly not want to live next to a large wind energy facility, accident or not. Those windmills are damned noisy, you know. And all the birds they suck in and spray out mess up the siding on the house.
Many of the loudest proponents of major change would like to change our entire way of life irregardless. The scientific evidence is merely part of their arguement, not what spurs their proposals.
There is a strong, backward 'make things like they used to be' strain to such ideologies, even though 'the way things used to be' as viewed by such people are largely nostalgic nonsense.
Yep, but when you're used to using the escape key on a Pee Cee keyboard up in the corner, it gets you sort of twitchy to have to do something different. Bad habit, I know, moving the hands off home row.
The VT-220 is really more of a historical relic. A console for getting on the Sparcs that don't have framebuffers, and not used much.
The laptop in question has the full compliment of 28 megs of RAM that is physically possible for it's design. It's a proprietary 24 meg module added to the pitiful 4 megs stock in that model. I specifically bought it second hand five years ago to run Linux on. It's the ultimate hacker's Toshiba 486, the T2105. The last and best Grayscale VGA Toshiba ever made. For some reason the marketing goons at Toshiba recycled the 2105 model number several years later for a newer model. It causes a lot of confusion when researching this particular model online.
It could be argued that having a GUI interface running on top of the operating system is much less efficient than having the GUI as a fundamental part of the OS.
Or the reverse could be argued. Lots of people here who are bigtime Linux/Unix advocates have made the case that one of the big problems with Windows NT is that the GUI is built in, whereas with Linux/Unix the GUI is seperate and not even necessary to the functionality of the whole. When Microsoft went from NT 3.51 to NT 4.0 one of the bad things they did was integrate the Graphics into the NT kernel, which reduced reliability considerably, and sabatogued the microkernel design.
That last paragraph sounds like you read it off a fax direct from Apple Marketing.
Manpower in the US is a private contract job service. I have worked as an employee of Manpower. Basically I got fifteen bucks an hour and they screwed the company I worked at for about $25 an hour.
What difference does it make if it's a shell running on top of an OS, or an OS that has the shell embedded in it. Either one is an OS, and MacOS (before they gave up and just bought NextStep, the same way Microsoft bought the first version of MS-DOS, from an outside vendor) is pretty much just as anaemic, or more so, than MS-DOS with Windows on top as a shell.
Back more than a few years ago I bought a retail box copy of Windows NT 3.51. It was only on floppy diskettes, that was the only version the store had.
I called up Microsoft and for a 'media charge' of ten dollars they send me the CDROM version.
It was actually a good deal, as I then had the floppy and the CD version and could install NT on machines that didn't have a CDROM drive.
The same exact thing happened with Visual C 1.0. I bought it retail-box and it was the floppy-only version. I ordered the CD from Microsoft.
I ordered the 5-1/4" diskette version of Windows 95, for a 'media charge' of $10 too. Its the primative very first version of Windows 95, and it does have a few plusses. No Internet Explorer at all, and no CD-Key or 'finger print the floppy' process. So copying all the 5-1/4" diskettes to a single folder on a CDR disk gives you a copy of Windows 95 that requires no Key, does no fingerprinting, and is pretty close to untracable.
Ordered the floppies for Windows 98 the same way (cheaper than the floppies themselve would have been retail) but I've never even broken them out of the plastic seal.
Microsoft has a clear, proven, track record of providing additional media copies of their software to people who have legitimate copies.
There were a few valid productivity apps for Windows 1.0. Micrografx In*A*Vision was a pretty nice vector-based drawing program. It evolved into Designer, the techie's preferred alternative to the more flouncy CorelDraw.
Back in that day, Windows 1.0 pretty much had to be given away. Early Windows apps came bundled with a 'runtime' version of Windows that would be installed as part of the process of installing the App. This in effect made the Windows/App bundle into a temporary run-time Windows environment.
The boxed copy of In*A*Vision in my collection comes with a runtime version of Windows 1.03.
I wouldn't say that MacOS was really an 'os' anymore than the Windows 1.0 shell running on top of MS-DOS.
Also, I don't get it why they don't list the GEM desktop or GeoWorks. Those were early and fairly popular GUI environments too. Certainly more popular in their time than Windows 1.0.
Those of us who run UNIX on machines like my Toshiba 486 laptop sorta resent you putting down FVWM. It works really well. It's disappointing that big fsking aircraft carrier bloatware desktops seem to be the defacto standard now.
I once plugged in a 1 MHz crystal oscillator in an AST 286 machine. Which made the machine into a 512 KHz 286.
I didn't have the patience to let it boot up all the way, though. I waited and waited and waited. Then I heard the floppy drive start going *bip* *bip* *bip* as it started the POST sequence of s-l-o-w-l-y stepping the head up to the top track and back to home. I said 'forget this' and put the original (12 MHz!) crystal back in.
I prefer to focus on the core vi functionality, and avoid any new non-standard bells and whistles. I have too many boxes here at home whose only connection to the outside is the ethernet cable. The BSD os'es all include vi built in, and emacs only as a package. And at a job not long ago even the OS/2 boxes, which all had telnet server daemons running on them, had a vi installed.
It's just nuts to use anything else. Bring up many editors in a remote shell and you just go to a blankscreen (the editor used direct screen writes, etc.) and the whole shooting match is over.
In emergencies, though, it's also useful to remember some of the ed commands. I don't think there's a UNIX system in existence that doesn't have ed lurking down there in/bin
Slashdot Mirror
I still have a copy of that Corel Office for Java beta that they came out with. I remember how badly it ran back when it came out, but about a year ago I brought it up on modern equipment. It really wasn't that bad. It was clearly seven years too early to go anywhere.
The things that they hope will be missing in these new non-desktop devices are:
Sorry. We don't want our dumb terminals back, and we don't want little gameboy like devices that tether us to the Man's information network.
Just for clarification, what is more DRM enabled about an Intel processor than an AMD processor?
I just want to know. I am not saying there isn't some detail that I am not aware of. Lately with unemployment I have been buying 'new' hardware mostly used off of eBay, and since there's so little AMD stuff out there (the market for AMD is far smaller, so the secondary market is smaller yet) I haven't fooled around with AMD stuff since my horrible mistake of buying a few K6 parts in the past.
The thing people forget is that OpenBSD is a much more tightly organized project than Linux or OSS in general. The OpenBSD developers are used to doing their work in a limited environment of reduced cost. The 'Image' of OpenBSD, i.e. the artwork, etc. has that kind of an aura about it (not meant at all as a put-down, more can often be done with less when the people involved are good at what they do).
The Red Hat organization was already getting crowded with the regular 'expense account' types by the time of their IPO. Obviously $2M wouldn't go far at that place.
The thing that really galls me about people who are strong, sometimes rabid, advocates of 'doing away with Legacy hardware' is that really, they're advocates of huge garbage landfills. It's fine to 'eliminate legacy design' if you're trying to sell new hardware in one or two year cycles to everybody. It's nuts if you're reasonable about what you spend and you want to incrementally upgrade to maintain your investment.
An excellent example of 'Legacy design practices' that work are the B-52 bombers. The airframes are almost always older than the pilots who fly them these days. The US Government probably couldn't afford to replace all the hardware we have long term investments in to keep the B-52 fleet running. And they shouldn't have to.
There do need to be 'breaks' with the past. Several significant breaks that I can think of in PC technology were the shift from the 'baby AT' to the ATX form factor for motherboards. The move from the 5-1/4" to 3-1/2" diskette and fixed disk drive footprint.
Finally, the organization that has Pissed me off the most when it comes to the 'anti-legacy' movement is Microsoft. They've for years advocated doing away with a number of legacy hardware features. I used to joke that the way to 'update' an older motherboard to be 'PC 2000' compliant (one of the Microsoft 'standards' they tried to impose for a vendor to get 'ready for Windows' labeling) was to use a side cutter to remove the serial, parallel, keyboard, and mouse ports, then fill the ISI slot board edge connectors with potting epoxy.
Ummm... fuck that.
Banner ads still blink?
I disabled animated gifs in Mozilla awhile back. I wish it was that easy to deflate and neuter advertising in other mediums.
Yes, there's still Flash, but at least some of the crap has been terminated.
That list sounds like a bunch of recent kuro5hin stories to me...
They can catch up if they want, but I'm not going to wait for them.
Catch up? The whole 'geek subculture' thing is an interesting side track. It's definitely not a vanguard. Don't be so full of yourself.
I'd certainly not want to live next to a large wind energy facility, accident or not. Those windmills are damned noisy, you know. And all the birds they suck in and spray out mess up the siding on the house.
Ad-homium name calling, eh? That's the extent of your counter arguement?
YHL HAND
Many of the loudest proponents of major change would like to change our entire way of life irregardless. The scientific evidence is merely part of their arguement, not what spurs their proposals.
There is a strong, backward 'make things like they used to be' strain to such ideologies, even though 'the way things used to be' as viewed by such people are largely nostalgic nonsense.
The biggest install base of code that I actually wrote is running on an embedded controller that runs at 400 KHz. It's a 4 bit processor, too.
Yep, but when you're used to using the escape key on a Pee Cee keyboard up in the corner, it gets you sort of twitchy to have to do something different. Bad habit, I know, moving the hands off home row.
The VT-220 is really more of a historical relic. A console for getting on the Sparcs that don't have framebuffers, and not used much.
The laptop in question has the full compliment of 28 megs of RAM that is physically possible for it's design. It's a proprietary 24 meg module added to the pitiful 4 megs stock in that model. I specifically bought it second hand five years ago to run Linux on. It's the ultimate hacker's Toshiba 486, the T2105. The last and best Grayscale VGA Toshiba ever made. For some reason the marketing goons at Toshiba recycled the 2105 model number several years later for a newer model. It causes a lot of confusion when researching this particular model online.
It could be argued that having a GUI interface running on top of the operating system is much less efficient than having the GUI as a fundamental part of the OS.
Or the reverse could be argued. Lots of people here who are bigtime Linux/Unix advocates have made the case that one of the big problems with Windows NT is that the GUI is built in, whereas with Linux/Unix the GUI is seperate and not even necessary to the functionality of the whole. When Microsoft went from NT 3.51 to NT 4.0 one of the bad things they did was integrate the Graphics into the NT kernel, which reduced reliability considerably, and sabatogued the microkernel design.
That last paragraph sounds like you read it off a fax direct from Apple Marketing.
Manpower in the US is a private contract job service. I have worked as an employee of Manpower. Basically I got fifteen bucks an hour and they screwed the company I worked at for about $25 an hour.
What difference does it make if it's a shell running on top of an OS, or an OS that has the shell embedded in it. Either one is an OS, and MacOS (before they gave up and just bought NextStep, the same way Microsoft bought the first version of MS-DOS, from an outside vendor) is pretty much just as anaemic, or more so, than MS-DOS with Windows on top as a shell.
Your Mac zeal is showing.
Here's $10,000. Good luck funding a vintage Xerox Alto for that price on eBay.
Back more than a few years ago I bought a retail box copy of Windows NT 3.51. It was only on floppy diskettes, that was the only version the store had.
I called up Microsoft and for a 'media charge' of ten dollars they send me the CDROM version.
It was actually a good deal, as I then had the floppy and the CD version and could install NT on machines that didn't have a CDROM drive.
The same exact thing happened with Visual C 1.0. I bought it retail-box and it was the floppy-only version. I ordered the CD from Microsoft.
I ordered the 5-1/4" diskette version of Windows 95, for a 'media charge' of $10 too. Its the primative very first version of Windows 95, and it does have a few plusses. No Internet Explorer at all, and no CD-Key or 'finger print the floppy' process. So copying all the 5-1/4" diskettes to a single folder on a CDR disk gives you a copy of Windows 95 that requires no Key, does no fingerprinting, and is pretty close to untracable.
Ordered the floppies for Windows 98 the same way (cheaper than the floppies themselve would have been retail) but I've never even broken them out of the plastic seal.
Microsoft has a clear, proven, track record of providing additional media copies of their software to people who have legitimate copies.
Thanks for the tip. If I ever upgrade to a p166 it'll probably be something I'll try. Mine is a 486DX-2 50.
There were a few valid productivity apps for Windows 1.0. Micrografx In*A*Vision was a pretty nice vector-based drawing program. It evolved into Designer, the techie's preferred alternative to the more flouncy CorelDraw.
Back in that day, Windows 1.0 pretty much had to be given away. Early Windows apps came bundled with a 'runtime' version of Windows that would be installed as part of the process of installing the App. This in effect made the Windows/App bundle into a temporary run-time Windows environment.
The boxed copy of In*A*Vision in my collection comes with a runtime version of Windows 1.03.
The discussion is of a graphical interface.
I wouldn't say that MacOS was really an 'os' anymore than the Windows 1.0 shell running on top of MS-DOS.
Also, I don't get it why they don't list the GEM desktop or GeoWorks. Those were early and fairly popular GUI environments too. Certainly more popular in their time than Windows 1.0.
Those of us who run UNIX on machines like my Toshiba 486 laptop sorta resent you putting down FVWM. It works really well. It's disappointing that big fsking aircraft carrier bloatware desktops seem to be the defacto standard now.
Looks aren't everything, you know.
I once plugged in a 1 MHz crystal oscillator in an AST 286 machine. Which made the machine into a 512 KHz 286.
I didn't have the patience to let it boot up all the way, though. I waited and waited and waited. Then I heard the floppy drive start going *bip* *bip* *bip* as it started the POST sequence of s-l-o-w-l-y stepping the head up to the top track and back to home. I said 'forget this' and put the original (12 MHz!) crystal back in.
I prefer to focus on the core vi functionality, and avoid any new non-standard bells and whistles. I have too many boxes here at home whose only connection to the outside is the ethernet cable. The BSD os'es all include vi built in, and emacs only as a package. And at a job not long ago even the OS/2 boxes, which all had telnet server daemons running on them, had a vi installed.
/bin
It's just nuts to use anything else. Bring up many editors in a remote shell and you just go to a blankscreen (the editor used direct screen writes, etc.) and the whole shooting match is over.
In emergencies, though, it's also useful to remember some of the ed commands. I don't think there's a UNIX system in existence that doesn't have ed lurking down there in