Umm, X is bigger than all the servers and related support libraries in BeOS! And it doesn't even have a MediaKit! Or a TCP/IP stack. Or a memory manager. Yikes! Also, stripped down X is more or less useless on the desktop, where all the (bloated) features are needed to make it feature competitive with other windowing environments. Besides, QNX Photon does everything X does, and is less than a meg in size. Eat that.
Umm, Win2K doesn't require reboots anymore for networking, and only some hardware actually requires rebooting (mostly stuff that requires a reboot in Linux too.) There goes that arguement.
Of course, its all moot. BeOS has been able to have different resolutions/color depths in each of its 32 workspaces for ages now, but that doesn't count, does it?
Oh oh. Another place where we will lose central configuration ability. Unlike Windows, X has no central architecture for GUI based configuration plug-ins. This means we should start to prepare for a boat-load of vendor-specific configuration program. Yet another reason I'm dreading moving to Linux...
Let's see, this is a game. Thus its being run on a desktop machine. I don't know about you, but I make all my directories readable to myself. The/home method works okay for a multiuser system, but really isn't appropriate for a single-user desktop system. What I was thinking was more of a registry type thing. Instead of dozens of directories stuffed into/home, there would be one registry (an XML text based one of course!) for each user and one for the system. Not only does this unify configs, but makes everything nice and neat. It could even be protected so apps could only use it through OS calls, and thus be even safer than using the/home method.
(this was not intended as a troll, btw).
>>>>>>>>>>>
Its really sad that you have to state that. On/., anything that doesn't extoll all the virtues of OSS programs and condemn MS for being capitalist pigs is taken as trolling. God forbid we should judge anything an technical merit.
Yeah, and he said the same thing about Windows ME and Windows 98. If Windows ME or 98 was the most important thing since Windows 95, then shouldn't Windows XP be the most important thing since Windows ME?
>>>>>>>>>
Lets go through a basic tutorial in algebra. If the importance level of Windows 95 was 10, the importance level of Windows 98 was 4, ME 6 and XP 9. Since there was nothing between '95 and '98, '98 was indeed the most important thing since '95, since 4 > 0. Now, '98 is between '95 and ME, but 6 > 4, so ME is the most important thing since '95. Lastly both '98 and ME are between '95 and XP, and 9 > 6 > 4, so XP is the most important thing since '95. Not really that hard when somebody explicates it all nice for you, is it?
Actually, I have another reply to this. See, in our psycholgy class, there was a book on the reading list that involved, well, it involved a... a polar bear... and a psychosexual disorder...
Umm, Linux is actually more bogged down by backwards compatibility than Windows. Windows just has 15 years of DOS baggage. Linux has 30 years of *NIX baggage. The difference is that Linux (and most *NIXs) tend to handle it better, but everyone still IS using creat to creatE files, just because K & R couldn't spell;)
PS> creat just sounds stupid, not efficient. Once, when asked what he would do differently with UNIX, Ritchie (I think) replied that he would spell creat properly this time.
in Linux you have a ~/.loki/tribes2
>>>>>>>>>>>>
I really which the UNIX weenies would come up with some better way to keep per-user configs then stuffing crap into my home directory!
Well, if you have unlimited money to throw at a problem, anyone can be an audiophile. In reality, if you can get the most performance out of what resources you have, then you are a true audiophile. Also, in the context of *computer* audio, the 4.1's are audiophile speakers. Given that my main use for audio is listening to music while coding, I don't get much enjoyment out of a home theater set, now do I?
I just think you're reading into this too much. The Midiland S4s are a pretty high-end set of speakers, and if you've never heard of them, you're obviously not an audiophile. Since he was mentioning that the audio effects in the game were awesome, I think it is quite appropriate to mention his speaker setup. After all, everything sounds awesome through my 400watt Klipsch 4.1's;)
Have you ever stopped to think that you aren't the one who gets to decide which license is "good" and which license is "not good?" I found it hilarious how people bitched about Qt being linked to KDE, even though it was the case of GPL'ed code including non-GPL'ed code, not vice versa. Trolltech was alright with it, the KDE devs were all right with it, and everyone else had no business having criticizing them
Lexus, yech. If I bought a car that expensive, it would only be with a Jag license plate. It's not marketing, but style. I don't agree with style over substance, or substance over style. The two are not mutually exclusive. If you make the hype, you better have the goods to back it up. If you have to goods, don't forget the hype to show it off. In the end, to each his own. There is no rule that says that nerds are not allowed to have any artistic sense.
Re:Where is the bottleneck, really?
on
Benchmark Madness
·
· Score: 2
Yea, things look pretty bleak. BeOS isn't officially dead, but nothing much is going on. eVilla got some attention recently though.
As for OSS development, it would be the best possible thing for BeOS. Even if Be has to strip out all the commerical code and release a non-working version of the source, great technology shouldn't be allowed to die. Something ala the BSD core team applied to the OS in its entirety (including userspace) would be great.
Tsk, tsk tsk. Is Rasterman the only geek with some asthetic sense? Names DO matter. UNIX, for example, is a very cool name. It makes you feel good to run a UNIX machine. However, the new gen of OSS programmers is ignoring the good-naming heritage of their UNIX ancestors. Linux just sounds nasty, GNOME sounds GIMPy (oh god, bad pun), XFce sounds gross, and all the G's and K's in GNOME and KDE apps creates a very childish resemblance to all the 64's at the end of Nintendo games. On the other hand, KDE is pretty good, ORBit is plausible, aRts is really nice sounding and fitting, and X is just plain cool.
Ha ha. I always loved how WinCE without caps was a very accurate term for the facial expression you get when using it. Something that seems to have gotten past the MS marketing dept.
Custom MIPS 4300i running at 93.75MHz (rounding off.) Don't ask me why I know this.
Re:Where is the bottleneck, really?
on
Benchmark Madness
·
· Score: 2
Good god, learn how a journaled FS works! Journaled filesystems only guarentee the consistancy of metadata, not user data. Thus, a well designed journaling FS is just as fast as a non journaling one. Writes to the journal only come into play when metadata is being modified, say when creating or deleting a file. And even then, all it involves is a couple of extra disk writes, which are coalesced into a sequential stream of writes in most systems. The actual performance hit of journaling is pretty negligable when it comes down to it. For example, the non-indexing version of BeOS performs on part with ext2 for metadata updates. Lastly, using B+trees isn't a "trick" its just plain good design. The same goes for allocation groups, storing extents in trees, etc. For example, while ext2 goes all over the disk to find all of the double indirect nodes for a large file, XFS simple does a tree lookup in (usually) one block.
Ever since I got my SBLive! soundcard and 4 channels speakers, I've been less than contented with BeOS. So, I have been faced with the painful prospect of looking for another OS. Although it fills my every need, I am loathe to go to Win2K because of my disdain for non-bash command lines, and my general dislike of Win32 programming. Thus, I am seriously thinking of moving to Linux, although it is essentially a least of three evils decision. So, without further ado, some of the problems with Linux on the desktop. (PS: Linux == the whole Linux system, X, KDE and all.)
A) Linux is a server OS. This was driven home to me the other day when some moron on/. went "Linux can't handle hundred of net devices without bringing down the IP stack, and you're worried about you're stupid desktop?" It seems to me that the majority of Linux developers find nothing wrong with developing for the 1% of users, at the expense of the 99% of users. The fact that GNOME uses CORBA (which, at only a few ten-thousands of invocations per second, i pitifully slow compared to the near 100K (16byte) messages per second handled by BeOS (or 400MB/sec of total messaging bandwidth shown with 1K messages)) at the expense of desktop performance. Both GNOME and KDE have tons of featuers that are great in theory, but are of little use in practice. Who really needs RPC to send a message to the taskbar that something should be added? Wouldn't SysV IPC work just as well?
B) Linux is slow. By default, the timeslices are a server oriented 50ms (on 2.4) and the lack of preemptibility in the kernel makes for terrible latency. To the user, the result is that Linux will compile 10% faster, but have a GUI unusablly unresponsive. When Windows2000 is more responsive than our OS, you know you're doing something terribly wrong. This could easily be fixed by splitting Linux into desktop and server versions (both with the same API, just different tuning) but it seems desktop users just don't carry that much clout in the kernel development world. (BTW, yes, theoretically a fork is doable, but in the real world, it isn't feasible). Then, given the fact that KDE 2 (which is the most advanced desktop at the moment) takes a second or two to launch most apps, why would anyone want Linux on the desktop? Certainly those used to fast OSs like Windows (tongue in cheek!)
C) Linux is bloated. KDE 2 sucks up over a dozen megs of HD space, and has a huge memory footprint. (About as big as Win2K). That is simply unacceptable. Sure one could use FVWM, but you can't compare something like Win2K (which has tons of features) to FVWM.
D) Linux is fragmented. My biggest issue is the Linux community's propensity to create new APIs. Although MS is a beast, they do make sure that there is only "one true way" of programming the system. There is something to be said for API coherence. It means that not matter the software configuration, all apps take full advantage of the user's machine. Right now, there are two major sound APIs, ALSA and OSS. On top of that, there are esound and aRts. Then there are the dozens of inbetween libraries. What, you expect me to use them all? Get real. Clue: Linux apps should not need to include "drivers" for the various sound systems. One OS should == one API. And don't even get me started on all the X toolkits.
You don't need to throughly research the topic. Fifteen minutes of reading the site and doing some quick searches on Google would turn up enough information. Its not like these are minor errors here. These are full blown the article is attributed the wrong meaning errors. These don't take extensive research to catch.
Is it just me, or does anti-MS fud have a fast path to the main page somewhere in the Slash code? I'm still trying to prove that Slash has an anti-BeOS hack that requires Net+ users to type their password twice before the system accepts the login, but my new project is finding the filtering software that gives priority to MS anticompetitive stories. Seriously, though, the volume of traffic on the/. main page isn't that big. Maybe ten stories per day max. You'd think they'd actually check out the stories that make it far along in the submission processes for them to consider posting it.
That means (in my mind) : 1) fixed hardware; a GForce 2MX or Kyro II board, 300 MHz PPC or ARM CPU, soundblaster live, I/O for television/video, embedded joypad ports, embedded DVD ROM, 10 GB hard disk, 56K modem etc
>>>>>>>>>
What? The Amiga was one of the most powerful machines of its day. That shit (comparitively) hardware you have listed could never be called an Amiga.
2) fixed software; EEPROM with the basic O/S which is transferred to Ram at boot time; after that, rest of the O/S is loaded from hard disk; the included hard disk will contain a pre-configured O/S that is ready to go
>>>>>>>>>
Umm, that describes every computer on sale now. The BIOS image is loaded into RAM (shadowing, remember?) which loads the OS from the harddisk, which (unless you build it) comes preconfigured. Or do you mean they should never release updates?
web-browser price around $300-$400;
>>>>>>>>>
What? Cheap is nice, but an Amiga at $300? Methinks you have Amiga's mixed up with the game machines. The Amiga's were quite expensive machines for their time.
you buy it, you hook it to the telly and voila...cheap web-surfing, cheap DVD player, cheap multimedia, and above all that a computer to do the calculations and write those CVs and letters. And a damn good game machine, too.
>>>>>>>>
Its called an playstation2. At Toys R Us for $300.
It will sell like hot cakes, for two reasons : 1) people are tired of the problems having with the PC and MS Windows/Linux 2) a typical good PC (that is able to run all of todays bloatware) costs around $700
>>>>>>>>>
Really. This explains why all these set top machines and $300 machines are selling like hotcakes.
when DirectX is established,
>>>>>>>>>>
Huh? You mean back in 1997?
we all should cash out for a GForce3 anyway(which costs around the money mentioned above for the home computer)
>>>>>>>>>>
Except it doesn't, it costs $350. Subtraction harder than C++? Maybe...
, because the older cards will not run anything in respectable frame rates
>>>>>>>>>
Explains why my old RivaTNT is running UT just fine? Most games run fine on lower end harware, and only serious gamers need absolutely smooth fps at high res. Still, what serious gamer buys a $300 machine? Seriously, though, a GeForce2 GTS is plenty fast for the next year or so, and is only $127 on Pricewatch. Pair that with a nice 1GHz Athlon ($208 on pricewatch w/ mobo) and some RAM ($170 per gig!) and you have a nice gaming machine that won't cost more than $1200 or so.
4) it would be almost portable (one unit, like the old Amigas 1200-600) but without the propriatery hardware used by todays portable PCs, because it would use standard hardware; I remember a friend who stuffed his A1200 in his suitcase and travelled with it!
>>>>>>>>>>>
Great. It'll be an unpropriatary iMac!
Slashdot Mirror
Wow. You're a dumbass. The Voodoo1 doesn't even DO 2D. Secondly, if you used a *real* 3D OS, you'd find the Win2K drivers are rock solid.
Umm, X is bigger than all the servers and related support libraries in BeOS! And it doesn't even have a MediaKit! Or a TCP/IP stack. Or a memory manager. Yikes! Also, stripped down X is more or less useless on the desktop, where all the (bloated) features are needed to make it feature competitive with other windowing environments. Besides, QNX Photon does everything X does, and is less than a meg in size. Eat that.
Umm, Win2K doesn't require reboots anymore for networking, and only some hardware actually requires rebooting (mostly stuff that requires a reboot in Linux too.) There goes that arguement.
Of course, its all moot. BeOS has been able to have different resolutions/color depths in each of its 32 workspaces for ages now, but that doesn't count, does it?
Oh oh. Another place where we will lose central configuration ability. Unlike Windows, X has no central architecture for GUI based configuration plug-ins. This means we should start to prepare for a boat-load of vendor-specific configuration program. Yet another reason I'm dreading moving to Linux...
Let's see, this is a game. Thus its being run on a desktop machine. I don't know about you, but I make all my directories readable to myself. The /home method works okay for a multiuser system, but really isn't appropriate for a single-user desktop system. What I was thinking was more of a registry type thing. Instead of dozens of directories stuffed into /home, there would be one registry (an XML text based one of course!) for each user and one for the system. Not only does this unify configs, but makes everything nice and neat. It could even be protected so apps could only use it through OS calls, and thus be even safer than using the /home method.
(this was not intended as a troll, btw). /., anything that doesn't extoll all the virtues of OSS programs and condemn MS for being capitalist pigs is taken as trolling. God forbid we should judge anything an technical merit.
>>>>>>>>>>>
Its really sad that you have to state that. On
Yeah, and he said the same thing about Windows ME and Windows 98. If Windows ME or 98 was the most important thing since Windows 95, then shouldn't Windows XP be the most important thing since Windows ME?
>>>>>>>>>
Lets go through a basic tutorial in algebra. If the importance level of Windows 95 was 10, the importance level of Windows 98 was 4, ME 6 and XP 9. Since there was nothing between '95 and '98, '98 was indeed the most important thing since '95, since 4 > 0. Now, '98 is between '95 and ME, but 6 > 4, so ME is the most important thing since '95. Lastly both '98 and ME are between '95 and XP, and 9 > 6 > 4, so XP is the most important thing since '95. Not really that hard when somebody explicates it all nice for you, is it?
Actually, I have another reply to this. See, in our psycholgy class, there was a book on the reading list that involved, well, it involved a... a polar bear... and a psychosexual disorder...
I think we should have a little talk.
You see, when a man and women love each other, and think they are ready... they, well...
Umm, Linux is actually more bogged down by backwards compatibility than Windows. Windows just has 15 years of DOS baggage. Linux has 30 years of *NIX baggage. The difference is that Linux (and most *NIXs) tend to handle it better, but everyone still IS using creat to creatE files, just because K & R couldn't spell ;)
PS> creat just sounds stupid, not efficient. Once, when asked what he would do differently with UNIX, Ritchie (I think) replied that he would spell creat properly this time.
in Linux you have a ~/.loki/tribes2
>>>>>>>>>>>>
I really which the UNIX weenies would come up with some better way to keep per-user configs then stuffing crap into my home directory!
Well, if you have unlimited money to throw at a problem, anyone can be an audiophile. In reality, if you can get the most performance out of what resources you have, then you are a true audiophile. Also, in the context of *computer* audio, the 4.1's are audiophile speakers. Given that my main use for audio is listening to music while coding, I don't get much enjoyment out of a home theater set, now do I?
I just think you're reading into this too much. The Midiland S4s are a pretty high-end set of speakers, and if you've never heard of them, you're obviously not an audiophile. Since he was mentioning that the audio effects in the game were awesome, I think it is quite appropriate to mention his speaker setup. After all, everything sounds awesome through my 400watt Klipsch 4.1's ;)
Have you ever stopped to think that you aren't the one who gets to decide which license is "good" and which license is "not good?" I found it hilarious how people bitched about Qt being linked to KDE, even though it was the case of GPL'ed code including non-GPL'ed code, not vice versa. Trolltech was alright with it, the KDE devs were all right with it, and everyone else had no business having criticizing them
Lexus, yech. If I bought a car that expensive, it would only be with a Jag license plate. It's not marketing, but style. I don't agree with style over substance, or substance over style. The two are not mutually exclusive. If you make the hype, you better have the goods to back it up. If you have to goods, don't forget the hype to show it off. In the end, to each his own. There is no rule that says that nerds are not allowed to have any artistic sense.
Yea, things look pretty bleak. BeOS isn't officially dead, but nothing much is going on. eVilla got some attention recently though.
As for OSS development, it would be the best possible thing for BeOS. Even if Be has to strip out all the commerical code and release a non-working version of the source, great technology shouldn't be allowed to die. Something ala the BSD core team applied to the OS in its entirety (including userspace) would be great.
Tsk, tsk tsk. Is Rasterman the only geek with some asthetic sense? Names DO matter. UNIX, for example, is a very cool name. It makes you feel good to run a UNIX machine. However, the new gen of OSS programmers is ignoring the good-naming heritage of their UNIX ancestors. Linux just sounds nasty, GNOME sounds GIMPy (oh god, bad pun), XFce sounds gross, and all the G's and K's in GNOME and KDE apps creates a very childish resemblance to all the 64's at the end of Nintendo games. On the other hand, KDE is pretty good, ORBit is plausible, aRts is really nice sounding and fitting, and X is just plain cool.
Ha ha. I always loved how WinCE without caps was a very accurate term for the facial expression you get when using it. Something that seems to have gotten past the MS marketing dept.
Custom MIPS 4300i running at 93.75MHz (rounding off.) Don't ask me why I know this.
Good god, learn how a journaled FS works! Journaled filesystems only guarentee the consistancy of metadata, not user data. Thus, a well designed journaling FS is just as fast as a non journaling one. Writes to the journal only come into play when metadata is being modified, say when creating or deleting a file. And even then, all it involves is a couple of extra disk writes, which are coalesced into a sequential stream of writes in most systems. The actual performance hit of journaling is pretty negligable when it comes down to it. For example, the non-indexing version of BeOS performs on part with ext2 for metadata updates. Lastly, using B+trees isn't a "trick" its just plain good design. The same goes for allocation groups, storing extents in trees, etc. For example, while ext2 goes all over the disk to find all of the double indirect nodes for a large file, XFS simple does a tree lookup in (usually) one block.
Ever since I got my SBLive! soundcard and 4 channels speakers, I've been less than contented with BeOS. So, I have been faced with the painful prospect of looking for another OS. Although it fills my every need, I am loathe to go to Win2K because of my disdain for non-bash command lines, and my general dislike of Win32 programming. Thus, I am seriously thinking of moving to Linux, although it is essentially a least of three evils decision. So, without further ado, some of the problems with Linux on the desktop. (PS: Linux == the whole Linux system, X, KDE and all.) A) Linux is a server OS. This was driven home to me the other day when some moron on /. went "Linux can't handle hundred of net devices without bringing down the IP stack, and you're worried about you're stupid desktop?" It seems to me that the majority of Linux developers find nothing wrong with developing for the 1% of users, at the expense of the 99% of users. The fact that GNOME uses CORBA (which, at only a few ten-thousands of invocations per second, i pitifully slow compared to the near 100K (16byte) messages per second handled by BeOS (or 400MB/sec of total messaging bandwidth shown with 1K messages)) at the expense of desktop performance. Both GNOME and KDE have tons of featuers that are great in theory, but are of little use in practice. Who really needs RPC to send a message to the taskbar that something should be added? Wouldn't SysV IPC work just as well?
B) Linux is slow. By default, the timeslices are a server oriented 50ms (on 2.4) and the lack of preemptibility in the kernel makes for terrible latency. To the user, the result is that Linux will compile 10% faster, but have a GUI unusablly unresponsive. When Windows2000 is more responsive than our OS, you know you're doing something terribly wrong. This could easily be fixed by splitting Linux into desktop and server versions (both with the same API, just different tuning) but it seems desktop users just don't carry that much clout in the kernel development world. (BTW, yes, theoretically a fork is doable, but in the real world, it isn't feasible). Then, given the fact that KDE 2 (which is the most advanced desktop at the moment) takes a second or two to launch most apps, why would anyone want Linux on the desktop? Certainly those used to fast OSs like Windows (tongue in cheek!)
C) Linux is bloated. KDE 2 sucks up over a dozen megs of HD space, and has a huge memory footprint. (About as big as Win2K). That is simply unacceptable. Sure one could use FVWM, but you can't compare something like Win2K (which has tons of features) to FVWM.
D) Linux is fragmented. My biggest issue is the Linux community's propensity to create new APIs. Although MS is a beast, they do make sure that there is only "one true way" of programming the system. There is something to be said for API coherence. It means that not matter the software configuration, all apps take full advantage of the user's machine. Right now, there are two major sound APIs, ALSA and OSS. On top of that, there are esound and aRts. Then there are the dozens of inbetween libraries. What, you expect me to use them all? Get real. Clue: Linux apps should not need to include "drivers" for the various sound systems. One OS should == one API. And don't even get me started on all the X toolkits.
You don't need to throughly research the topic. Fifteen minutes of reading the site and doing some quick searches on Google would turn up enough information. Its not like these are minor errors here. These are full blown the article is attributed the wrong meaning errors. These don't take extensive research to catch.
Is it just me, or does anti-MS fud have a fast path to the main page somewhere in the Slash code? I'm still trying to prove that Slash has an anti-BeOS hack that requires Net+ users to type their password twice before the system accepts the login, but my new project is finding the filtering software that gives priority to MS anticompetitive stories. Seriously, though, the volume of traffic on the /. main page isn't that big. Maybe ten stories per day max. You'd think they'd actually check out the stories that make it far along in the submission processes for them to consider posting it.
Dude! You gotta stop hitting that crack man.
That means (in my mind) : 1) fixed hardware; a GForce 2MX or Kyro II board, 300 MHz PPC or ARM CPU, soundblaster live, I/O for television/video, embedded joypad ports, embedded DVD ROM, 10 GB hard disk, 56K modem etc
>>>>>>>>>
What? The Amiga was one of the most powerful machines of its day. That shit (comparitively) hardware you have listed could never be called an Amiga.
2) fixed software; EEPROM with the basic O/S which is transferred to Ram at boot time; after that, rest of the O/S is loaded from hard disk; the included hard disk will contain a pre-configured O/S that is ready to go
>>>>>>>>>
Umm, that describes every computer on sale now. The BIOS image is loaded into RAM (shadowing, remember?) which loads the OS from the harddisk, which (unless you build it) comes preconfigured. Or do you mean they should never release updates?
web-browser price around $300-$400;
>>>>>>>>>
What? Cheap is nice, but an Amiga at $300? Methinks you have Amiga's mixed up with the game machines. The Amiga's were quite expensive machines for their time.
you buy it, you hook it to the telly and voila...cheap web-surfing, cheap DVD player, cheap multimedia, and above all that a computer to do the calculations and write those CVs and letters. And a damn good game machine, too.
>>>>>>>>
Its called an playstation2. At Toys R Us for $300.
It will sell like hot cakes, for two reasons : 1) people are tired of the problems having with the PC and MS Windows/Linux 2) a typical good PC (that is able to run all of todays bloatware) costs around $700
>>>>>>>>>
Really. This explains why all these set top machines and $300 machines are selling like hotcakes.
when DirectX is established,
>>>>>>>>>>
Huh? You mean back in 1997?
we all should cash out for a GForce3 anyway(which costs around the money mentioned above for the home computer)
>>>>>>>>>>
Except it doesn't, it costs $350. Subtraction harder than C++? Maybe...
, because the older cards will not run anything in respectable frame rates
>>>>>>>>>
Explains why my old RivaTNT is running UT just fine? Most games run fine on lower end harware, and only serious gamers need absolutely smooth fps at high res. Still, what serious gamer buys a $300 machine? Seriously, though, a GeForce2 GTS is plenty fast for the next year or so, and is only $127 on Pricewatch. Pair that with a nice 1GHz Athlon ($208 on pricewatch w/ mobo) and some RAM ($170 per gig!) and you have a nice gaming machine that won't cost more than $1200 or so.
4) it would be almost portable (one unit, like the old Amigas 1200-600) but without the propriatery hardware used by todays portable PCs, because it would use standard hardware; I remember a friend who stuffed his A1200 in his suitcase and travelled with it!
>>>>>>>>>>>
Great. It'll be an unpropriatary iMac!
Hey, they have this great new invention called a sentence. Should I submit this on Slashdot? Its "News Nerds Could Use."