I see a lot of comments on how people MUST upgrade their hardware to run Windows XP.
I have run Windows XP on a 233MMX with 128MB RAM on a DFI motherboard with an ATI video card. The system performed usably and stably. I was using it as a headless scanning machine, ISA SCSI with HP ScanJet IIcx, since XP was first released until my recent hardware upgrade.
At one of my client sites we are running Windows XP on a K6-2/350 with 256MB RAM and it runs very well.
My biggest key on keeping such systems running at a usable, and non-frutsrating speed, is to keep them clean of garbage software and pre-loaders.
Now, that's not to say that all machines with similar specs will run well. My girlfriend has a PII-333 with 192MB RAM that runs XP Pro like absolute garbage, versus an HP Brio Celeron 300A with 128MB RAM which runs it like a champ, far faster than hers.
What I came to understand, as a general rule of thumb and assuming a clean system, after several dozen 98SE-to-XP upgrades is that if the machine ran like dog snot in a snow storm under 98, you're not going to get miracles by upgrading to XP.
Indeed... why else would just about EVERY computer would not have come with BASIC either in the console ROM or on a bootable floppy? Why else would COMPUTE! magazine have been so successful?
The TI-99/4A had to be one of the greatest flops of the era, aside from the PCjr.
TI tried to compete in a market where they didn't belong. The 99/4 and 4A used a 16-bit processor, unlike its intended competition (VIC-20, C64, et al) which only had an 8-bit 6502 or compatible. The system was deliberately crippled to keep price points down, such as using an 8-bit data bus instead of 16-bit (although a 16-bit is available externally,) using a BASIC interpreter written on top of another interpreted language, all stored in video memory (adding more latency.) TI BASIC is HORRIBLY slow and almost unusable when compared to the likes of AppleSoft BASIC or Commodore BASIC 2, 3, or 7.
Near the end of TI's Home Computer invasion, the 99/4A was sold at incredibly stupid prices with incredibly stupid rebates. This is why my parents bought the computer. I played with the C64 and the 99/4A at K-Mart's displays, but the 99/4A ranked best in pricing for that Christmas, and thus ended up under our tree.
I'm not so certain this computer should have made the list, but it certainly helped detail how NOT to compete in the computer arena, and ranked TI up very high in inept management decisions. I'd say very close to the level on ineptitude which helped drive Commodore into the ground.
I don't recall seeing one, but I think a great article would be the most spectacular failures of the computer industry. Atari's closed licensing, Commodore's crappy support and shyt management style, TI's horrible home computer management. I'm sure there's plenty more!
I have to say that I, too, am disappointed to see the Newton removed from the list -- even though in favor of my beloved Amiga, and it is my Amiga comment he first quotes in the re-write.
I remember how badly I wanted a Newton, but the pricing was a little steep for me at the time. I agree that the Newton, like much of what came out of the 80's, was ground-breaking and well before its time. Even now there is a lasting community of Newton users, some who have even protested at Apple conventions (Google for it, I'm too lazy to re-research this.:)
Speaking of the 80's, I can't help but get on the thought-track of how the ideas of the 80's with the technology of today could have been fantastic! But then again, I don't think people were really ready for the applications of those ideas... heck, we're still not ready for a lot of them now.
Speaking of trying to turn the Amiga into a game console, I'm in need of an NTSC CD-32 power supply. Every place I've checked is out of them... anyone have a source for these?
I tried to post this as a reply yesterday, but couldn't get to the site after spending my time typing, then I lost what I typed, etc blah.
Anyway, it seems to me that we could also use something like Amiga FFS or PFS (with the appropriate drivers.) Sorry, couldn't resist.
But seriously, will the licensing only cover the manufacture of media formatted in FAT, or the media and FAT-capable devices? In the case of the former, just distribute unformatted media and require it be formatted by a device or PC before use.
But why not use something like an ISO format and make the systems use the media like a CD-ROM. Would work, wouldn't it?
Or worse yet for Microsoft, the development of a free/open filesystem (oh wait, there are a few already, huh?) that once proliferated, Microsoft would be forced to implement. Remember USB2.0? Not available in the first release of XP, then finally MS says "oh, okay... it's in use enough, we'll support it natively."
Now for something really off the rocker. It seems to me that this case would fall under the same cases of brand names being so universally identified with a product that all products are generically refered to with that brand name. For example, Kleenex for tissues, Rollerblades for in-line skates, Velcro for hook-and-loop fasteners, etc.
FAT has enjoyed such a ubiquitous use for so long that it has become the generic filesystem of choice. It would seem damn anti-industry-social to suddenly start charging for it.
They sound more like crack dealers. The first 20 years are free, but then you have to pay for it. The difference being, of course, that crack dealers are up-front with this:)
Fuggedaboudit. Someone noted in another post that this is a dumb daemon that just returns responses in a certain order. OK OK OK 550 OK 221 or something like that.
I got curious about that smtp port. It's pretty rude, too... apparently doesn't like talking to <>.
telnet sitefinder-idn.verisign.com smtp Trying 64.94.110.11... Connected to sitefinder-idn.verisign.com. Escape character is '^]'. 220 snubby2-wceast Snubby Mail Rejector Daemon v1.3 ready ehlo mailhost 250 OK mail from: <postmaster@somebogusdomain.com> 250 OK rcpt to: <postmaster@anotherbogusdomain.com> 550 User domain does not exist. rset 250 OK mail from: <> 221 snubby2-wceast Snubby Mail Rejector Daemon v1.3 closing transmission channel
Buddy of mine got such a visit; they threatened to arrest him at work and everything. He works in a security sensitive environment, so getting arrested would have cost him his job.
I set him up with a lawyer and everything, ready to fight. Instead he takes out a $10k loan... and the phuqrs (DirecTV) never called back. So, he went on vacation.
That sounds about right for me as well. I remember that Hardees was selling these mini telescope things to use to see it in the night sky. I lived in North Dakota at the time and the clear nights (I seem to recall seeing it in the winter) were perfect for viewing. Being 17 miles from the nearest city's lights also helped. It was actually quite awesome and I believe I still have the telescope in a box somewhere... though I doubt it, or for that matter Hardees, will survive to 2062.
I wish I could accurately describe the telescope... it was a hinged box with two sides that expanded into three flaps each, and on the two flat sides (top and bottom, if you will) it had plastic lenses. A rubber band was inside the thing connected to some of the three flaps (without obscuring the view-path) to make it contract into its box-like shape. You then squeezed it together to expand it in order to focus on the comet. You could squeeze it completely flat, in which shape it looked much like an asterisk (in the old Apple ][ or TI-99/4A character set sense.)
It worked great for viewing Halley's Comet, as well as the girl who lived across the street from me. Ahhhh, how I remember the sweet, pubescent, acne-riddled, youthful love:)
As an admin myself, I found this problem somewhat frustrating, but easily correctable.
However, I think its fabulous. By banning the entire world, JJ has shown that the world as a whole is responsible for this spam mess we are all facing, and that he's not showing favoritism for everyone.
(How to I qualify the world? Easily; first the spammers, second the phuqwits that buy from spammers, third the idiot politicians that don't understand the problem, fourth the jackass politicians who don't care about the problem, and fifth the apathetic users who ignore the problem but bitch about it all the time.)
In the end, I think this is quite funny. Sure, I had to reconfig about a dozen servers, but 1) I got to bill time for it, and 2) it's not that big of a deal.
I have to call prior are on this one. In the Amiga ICQ client I used an ARexx script which piped stuff through Babelfish. (Like the department header says.) We used similar scripts in IRC.
Is it just me, or does the US Patent System seem to be nothing more than government funded and supported extortion?
Something else to support the HTTP argument is that MOST HTTP servers support zlib compression. Compression is why I use sftp/scp... across a 1.5Mb/s ADSL connection I downloaded the 167MB gcc-3.2.1 package for Intel Solaris 8 at an average of 557kB/s, with peeks at 600kB/s! Uncompressed it came over at 162kBs.
But then, a properly config'd ftp server/client pair can offer compression, too, like AmFTP and the WUArchive server.
Slashdot Mirror
I see a lot of comments on how people MUST upgrade their hardware to run Windows XP.
I have run Windows XP on a 233MMX with 128MB RAM on a DFI motherboard with an ATI video card. The system performed usably and stably. I was using it as a headless scanning machine, ISA SCSI with HP ScanJet IIcx, since XP was first released until my recent hardware upgrade.
At one of my client sites we are running Windows XP on a K6-2/350 with 256MB RAM and it runs very well.
My biggest key on keeping such systems running at a usable, and non-frutsrating speed, is to keep them clean of garbage software and pre-loaders.
Now, that's not to say that all machines with similar specs will run well. My girlfriend has a PII-333 with 192MB RAM that runs XP Pro like absolute garbage, versus an HP Brio Celeron 300A with 128MB RAM which runs it like a champ, far faster than hers.
What I came to understand, as a general rule of thumb and assuming a clean system, after several dozen 98SE-to-XP upgrades is that if the machine ran like dog snot in a snow storm under 98, you're not going to get miracles by upgrading to XP.
Indeed... why else would just about EVERY computer would not have come with BASIC either in the console ROM or on a bootable floppy? Why else would COMPUTE! magazine have been so successful?
The TI-99/4A had to be one of the greatest flops of the era, aside from the PCjr.
TI tried to compete in a market where they didn't belong. The 99/4 and 4A used a 16-bit processor, unlike its intended competition (VIC-20, C64, et al) which only had an 8-bit 6502 or compatible. The system was deliberately crippled to keep price points down, such as using an 8-bit data bus instead of 16-bit (although a 16-bit is available externally,) using a BASIC interpreter written on top of another interpreted language, all stored in video memory (adding more latency.) TI BASIC is HORRIBLY slow and almost unusable when compared to the likes of AppleSoft BASIC or Commodore BASIC 2, 3, or 7.
Near the end of TI's Home Computer invasion, the 99/4A was sold at incredibly stupid prices with incredibly stupid rebates. This is why my parents bought the computer. I played with the C64 and the 99/4A at K-Mart's displays, but the 99/4A ranked best in pricing for that Christmas, and thus ended up under our tree.
I'm not so certain this computer should have made the list, but it certainly helped detail how NOT to compete in the computer arena, and ranked TI up very high in inept management decisions. I'd say very close to the level on ineptitude which helped drive Commodore into the ground.
I don't recall seeing one, but I think a great article would be the most spectacular failures of the computer industry. Atari's closed licensing, Commodore's crappy support and shyt management style, TI's horrible home computer management. I'm sure there's plenty more!
I have to say that I, too, am disappointed to see the Newton removed from the list -- even though in favor of my beloved Amiga, and it is my Amiga comment he first quotes in the re-write.
:)
I remember how badly I wanted a Newton, but the pricing was a little steep for me at the time. I agree that the Newton, like much of what came out of the 80's, was ground-breaking and well before its time. Even now there is a lasting community of Newton users, some who have even protested at Apple conventions (Google for it, I'm too lazy to re-research this.
Speaking of the 80's, I can't help but get on the thought-track of how the ideas of the 80's with the technology of today could have been fantastic! But then again, I don't think people were really ready for the applications of those ideas... heck, we're still not ready for a lot of them now.
Speaking of trying to turn the Amiga into a game console, I'm in need of an NTSC CD-32 power supply. Every place I've checked is out of them... anyone have a source for these?
I tried to post this as a reply yesterday, but couldn't get to the site after spending my time typing, then I lost what I typed, etc blah.
:)
Anyway, it seems to me that we could also use something like Amiga FFS or PFS (with the appropriate drivers.) Sorry, couldn't resist.
But seriously, will the licensing only cover the manufacture of media formatted in FAT, or the media and FAT-capable devices? In the case of the former, just distribute unformatted media and require it be formatted by a device or PC before use.
But why not use something like an ISO format and make the systems use the media like a CD-ROM. Would work, wouldn't it?
Or worse yet for Microsoft, the development of a free/open filesystem (oh wait, there are a few already, huh?) that once proliferated, Microsoft would be forced to implement. Remember USB2.0? Not available in the first release of XP, then finally MS says "oh, okay... it's in use enough, we'll support it natively."
Now for something really off the rocker. It seems to me that this case would fall under the same cases of brand names being so universally identified with a product that all products are generically refered to with that brand name. For example, Kleenex for tissues, Rollerblades for in-line skates, Velcro for hook-and-loop fasteners, etc.
FAT has enjoyed such a ubiquitous use for so long that it has become the generic filesystem of choice. It would seem damn anti-industry-social to suddenly start charging for it.
They sound more like crack dealers. The first 20 years are free, but then you have to pay for it. The difference being, of course, that crack dealers are up-front with this
First UniSys and GIF, now Microsoft and FAT.
Fuggedaboudit. Someone noted in another post that this is a dumb daemon that just returns responses in a certain order. OK OK OK 550 OK 221 or something like that.
I got curious about that smtp port. It's pretty rude, too... apparently doesn't like talking to <>.
telnet sitefinder-idn.verisign.com smtp
Trying 64.94.110.11...
Connected to sitefinder-idn.verisign.com.
Escape character is '^]'.
220 snubby2-wceast Snubby Mail Rejector Daemon v1.3 ready
ehlo mailhost
250 OK
mail from: <postmaster@somebogusdomain.com>
250 OK
rcpt to: <postmaster@anotherbogusdomain.com>
550 User domain does not exist.
rset
250 OK
mail from: <>
221 snubby2-wceast Snubby Mail Rejector Daemon v1.3 closing transmission channel
Buddy of mine got such a visit; they threatened to arrest him at work and everything. He works in a security sensitive environment, so getting arrested would have cost him his job.
I set him up with a lawyer and everything, ready to fight. Instead he takes out a $10k loan... and the phuqrs (DirecTV) never called back. So, he went on vacation.
That sounds about right for me as well. I remember that Hardees was selling these mini telescope things to use to see it in the night sky. I lived in North Dakota at the time and the clear nights (I seem to recall seeing it in the winter) were perfect for viewing. Being 17 miles from the nearest city's lights also helped. It was actually quite awesome and I believe I still have the telescope in a box somewhere... though I doubt it, or for that matter Hardees, will survive to 2062.
:)
I wish I could accurately describe the telescope... it was a hinged box with two sides that expanded into three flaps each, and on the two flat sides (top and bottom, if you will) it had plastic lenses. A rubber band was inside the thing connected to some of the three flaps (without obscuring the view-path) to make it contract into its box-like shape. You then squeezed it together to expand it in order to focus on the comet. You could squeeze it completely flat, in which shape it looked much like an asterisk (in the old Apple ][ or TI-99/4A character set sense.)
It worked great for viewing Halley's Comet, as well as the girl who lived across the street from me. Ahhhh, how I remember the sweet, pubescent, acne-riddled, youthful love
As an admin myself, I found this problem somewhat frustrating, but easily correctable.
However, I think its fabulous. By banning the entire world, JJ has shown that the world as a whole is responsible for this spam mess we are all facing, and that he's not showing favoritism for everyone.
(How to I qualify the world? Easily; first the spammers, second the phuqwits that buy from spammers, third the idiot politicians that don't understand the problem, fourth the jackass politicians who don't care about the problem, and fifth the apathetic users who ignore the problem but bitch about it all the time.)
In the end, I think this is quite funny. Sure, I had to reconfig about a dozen servers, but 1) I got to bill time for it, and 2) it's not that big of a deal.
I have to call prior are on this one. In the Amiga ICQ client I used an ARexx script which piped stuff through Babelfish. (Like the department header says.) We used similar scripts in IRC.
Is it just me, or does the US Patent System seem to be nothing more than government funded and supported extortion?
But then, a properly config'd ftp server/client pair can offer compression, too, like AmFTP and the WUArchive server.
*sigh* Choices choices :)
2003-01-19 16:38:39 Sun Releases Solaris 9 for Intel (articles,sun) (rejected)
SYS 64738 isn't TRS-80, that's Commodore 64 :)