You could always use both. Give out the disposables to anyone who wants one, and hand out a few A60's to the people you trust. That way you get the best of both worlds.
ME does allow it, but they basically nuetered DOS in ME for no good reason. There is a command prompt in Windows, but if you want to get to DOS with no Windows running in the background, it's impossible in Windows ME without creating an emergancy startup diskette, then removing all stuff on it you don't want. If you want to play around in DOS, 98SE really is the last operating system from Microsoft you would want to run.
Replying to the parent, what about OSes like FreeDos to talk to your cards? I also believe IBM is still maintaining a version of PC-DOS too for cash registers and stuff like that.
www.expensable.com seems to work fine in Opera 7.23, but I can't log in so I can't comment on that.
www.scps.nyu.edu bitches about Opera not being a 4.0 browser (sigh). However, I hit F12 and tell Opera to identify as IE 6.0 and the page loads just fine. They should really just remove that bit about needing a 4.0 browser. Nowadays, that's just dumb.
Sometimes it's not worth risking your life for something like fixing a flat tire.
I would of let the car run, providing me with heat and shelter, and either sat in it waiting for help (like a ride, fetch the car later) - or possibly tried to change the tire, but taking a break in the car every few minutes. Unless you were stupid enough to be driving around on empty, your car should of been able to idle for hours with no problems.
I'm sure the power supply isn't the only thing that is cheap on those eMachines... better off spending the money to get a good machine, than $1200 on something that may or may not work after a year.
I could never get USB support to work on Windows 95. NEVER. I tried and tried, and it just doesn't go. So don't waste your time trying. Same with a lot of hardware, it needs 98SE or better for the drivers to install, though with some hacking it is possible to get some stuff to work on 95b. I had 80GB+ drives going, ATA100 Raid cards, CD burners running...
Windows 95b will fail on never hardware. I think it's AMDs faster than about 350Mhz. It would cause a bluescreen error upon bootup. I don't know about Intel. Microsoft did have a patch for this. The patch was the stupidest thing ever, since it had to be installed IN Windows. It was kind of an intermittant thing with the borderline chips, just keep on resetting the computer and eventually you will get it to boot in Windows. But with faster computers (like K6-III's) it would never make it to the desktop. In order to work around it, I would have to install the patch on an slower computer, and then copy the files the patch changed to the fast one and it would boot. Then install the patch on the fast one so it would stop complaining about version errors.
Ahh the good ol' days of Windows 95b. I set it up on my old K6-III and it ran stable (about 2 weeks uptime between reboots) for about 4 years. Sure, it had some issues, but it never just took a crap on itself and stop working like Windows 95 original/98/98SE/ME have done. Then I bought a new computer, which has Windows 2000. I then wiped the old (but working) Windows 95b install and put Windows 2000 on the K6-III and gave it to my uncle.
I still have a Pentium I running Windows 95b. Last summer I got it to the 49.71 day limit. During that time it was actually used too, mostly to talk to an ancient flatbed scanner and some web browsing in Opera 5.
A lot of that can still be done, provided you install Windows XP/2000 on a FAT32 partition (generally a good idea). Just make a DOS bootdisk on Windows 95b/98/98SE and away you go. For that reason, I'll probably *never* get rid of my Pentium I running Windows 95b because I never know when I'll need a DOS bootdisk, or DOS itself.
On most modern computers, you can use Knoppix to do the same thing. Knoppix is actually a lot more useful, because you get internet, a GUI, tons of useful tools, and it can talk to things like USB hard drives. But I still say install Windows 2000/XP on FAT32, because NTFS support in Linux (for writing to partitions, not reading) is still iffy.
Another bonus of Knoppix is that it can really impress people... "You just booted WHAT off of a CD?!? That's cool!"
Re:How to get rid of the search assistant:
on
PC Annoyances
·
· Score: 1
I find it kind of funny how that website is so horribly broken outside of IE.
My guess would be Secondary Master with no slave. Primary slave would be bad, as it would be sharing a channel with your harddrive, so don't do it. It usually isn't a problem if it shares a channel with another CD/DVD/CDRW drive as long as you don't use the other drive while burning a disk, but you never know.
Well, you can always wipe the hard drive and reuse it next time you want to backup. Didn't think about that, now did you?
Also very fast, and you can set it and go. 80GB can be done in a couple of hours with no supervision. 80GB on DVD disks would mean over 20 disks, and you have to sit there and babysit the computer, feeding it a new disk every 15 minutes. Ugh.
I might have to try that again. Last time I messed around with Windows 98, fdisk wouldn't let me create very large partitions. Actually, fdisk just doesn't play will with larger drives. I also have a somewhat dated copy of Partition Magic (5.0?), that only lets me create FAT32 partitions of silghtly over 60GB, without spitting out errors.
Perhaps I'll try booting Knoppix just too see what happens. I just got another 80GB external drive that I haven't put anything on yet, so I can expirement around without the risk of losing data on the drive.
People like me with External hard disks. I'm still at a bit of a loss on how I am supposed to format a 120GB USB2.0 external disk so that it is one large 120GB partition, still have it readable/writeble by Windows 2000, and not use NTFS.
A most excellent reason to convert a computer to Dvorak. Your coworkers may hate you, but you'll have a computer that noone else is going to touch.
The image we want to project?
on
Linux in 2004?
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
Maybe having Linux being "good enough for government work" isn't exactly the image we want Linux to have. Just like I think having Linux on cheap, disposable, sub-par computers from places like Wal-mart may not be the best thing either.
The real goal is to have people see Linux as a viable alternative, not a cheap Windows imitation or some eccentric thing the government uses.
Fitting a line to data in OpenOffice isn't that hard. It's actually done the same way as it is done in Excel. Check out the LINEST command. The syntax is identical. The GUI for it is a little different, but works. Getting to that GUI is a bit different though. In Excel there is a nice button on the toolbar in the default install to insert a function - but in OpenOffice it's buried in the menu (Insert menu -> Insert Function... or CTRL-F2 if you want). Of course, you can customize the toolbar in both OpenOffice and Excel, but so few people do so.
But I think I get the idea behind the CD. People are willing to try out free software. Many are not willing to give up Windows just yet though.
So give them a taste of what's out there via free software that runs on top of Windows. Once they get used to the idea and see how great the software is, then they will be more willing to take the plunge and switch to running Linux.
Not hard at all, but then how do you get people to upgrade if their current word processor does everything they want? MS Office is Microsoft's bread and butter. They need people to upgrade every few years. They want a dependable revenue stream from Office users.
But even with all the tricks Microsoft has pulled (incompatible file formats, cutting support, not fixing bugs, etc.) - Microsoft still has the problem of a lot of people using Office 97 with no intentions of upgrading.
That's one of the nice things about free software, there isn't so much of a motive to break the older versions to force people to upgrade. But I suppose when you don't have to pay for the upgrade, less people are going to cling to the older version anyway.
I was talking to a friend the other day about a bunch of lab computers that my school is getting rid of - a bunch of old Pentium MMX's. He suggested turning them into a cluster. But after thinking about it, I realized that the group of about 10 old computers we had would consume more power - and would likely be considerably slower than a single one of the 2.4Ghz Dell's that replaced them. "What's the point?" I said.
Applying that here, the little VIA chips run at roughly the speed of a Celeron 500 or so, I'd say something like an AMD Athlon 3GHz would be just about as fast as about 6 of the VIA chips. So you are still saving some power, but as not as much as it would seem as first, as you need many low power chips to equal the speed of one faster chip. Not to mention power consumed by having more motherboards, network cards, switches, and other associated hardware.
Something to really look at is the cluster of G5's. The G5 chips use a lot less power than their x86 counterparts. I bet that cluster of G5's is probably right up there in terms of processing power per watt as this VIA super computer. And it's way more cool to boot.
The reason the TI-82 had it, but the TI-85 lacked it is because the 82 is actually a newer calculator. The TI-85 was the 2nd graphing calculator TI produced, with the TI-81 being the first. By the time they made the TI-82 TI had figured out a few things like PxText(), multiple line history, and a much improved statistics package.
The TI-86 was the successor to the TI-85. I was pretty disappointed with it myself. It was basically a TI-85 with more memory. Some things like putting ", and other characters on the ALPHA-shifted keys wasn't done (which was desperately needed), some buttons were moved around for no reason, some functions renamed for no reason, the memory paging caused a significant performance hit, the TI-86's built in assembly language support was pretty buggy and clumsy while the TI-85's hacked assembly support was smooth and stable. The thing that pissed me off the most was the fact that the TI-86 did not include features that the already released TI-83 did, which was mostly statistics stuff. Even the add-on TI offered didn't include all of it, but most of it.
And I still use my TI-85 pretty much daily. I also use my HP-48G a lot too. I basically understand the TI-85 inside and out, I wish I could say the same for the HP (which is a much more complicated and harder to use calculator, but that is because it is far more powerful than the TI-85).
Funny that, as just about every tape player I have ever had starts eating tapes after a while. And when a tape gets eaten, that just sucks.
On the other hand, I have broken a few CD players over the years. Well, actually, I have busted a few cheapo CD-Rom drives, one really old CD boombox (which I may add the CD player outlasted both tape decks it had) and one car CD deck that survived 5 years and 45,000 miles of continous use (I don't listen to the radio). But overall, I would say that CD players are more reliable, plus when one goes it tends to not take the media with it.
Kodak has adapted quite well to changing technology. They sell digital cameras (including pro-level digital SLRs), online printing services, paper for inkjet printers, the printers themselves, software, and tons of other products that have to do with digital photography. And they still do film, and they will probably do it for a long time, though it will probably be a smaller and smaller division as the years go by. I would hardly expect Kodak to dissappear, unlike AOL or the RIAA.
Actually, what I would do is to program it to read the 1's and 0's from the beginning to the end of the disk. Once you have the raw data off of the entire disk, it would be a lot easier to try to decipher it as one big file on the computer. And if you can get a CD burner to write the 1's and 0's exactly like that, trivial to make a perfect copy.
Slashdot Mirror
You could always use both. Give out the disposables to anyone who wants one, and hand out a few A60's to the people you trust. That way you get the best of both worlds.
ME does allow it, but they basically nuetered DOS in ME for no good reason. There is a command prompt in Windows, but if you want to get to DOS with no Windows running in the background, it's impossible in Windows ME without creating an emergancy startup diskette, then removing all stuff on it you don't want. If you want to play around in DOS, 98SE really is the last operating system from Microsoft you would want to run.
Replying to the parent, what about OSes like FreeDos to talk to your cards? I also believe IBM is still maintaining a version of PC-DOS too for cash registers and stuff like that.
www.expensable.com seems to work fine in Opera 7.23, but I can't log in so I can't comment on that.
www.scps.nyu.edu bitches about Opera not being a 4.0 browser (sigh). However, I hit F12 and tell Opera to identify as IE 6.0 and the page loads just fine. They should really just remove that bit about needing a 4.0 browser. Nowadays, that's just dumb.
Sometimes it's not worth risking your life for something like fixing a flat tire.
I would of let the car run, providing me with heat and shelter, and either sat in it waiting for help (like a ride, fetch the car later) - or possibly tried to change the tire, but taking a break in the car every few minutes. Unless you were stupid enough to be driving around on empty, your car should of been able to idle for hours with no problems.
I'm sure the power supply isn't the only thing that is cheap on those eMachines... better off spending the money to get a good machine, than $1200 on something that may or may not work after a year.
I could never get USB support to work on Windows 95. NEVER. I tried and tried, and it just doesn't go. So don't waste your time trying. Same with a lot of hardware, it needs 98SE or better for the drivers to install, though with some hacking it is possible to get some stuff to work on 95b. I had 80GB+ drives going, ATA100 Raid cards, CD burners running...
Windows 95b will fail on never hardware. I think it's AMDs faster than about 350Mhz. It would cause a bluescreen error upon bootup. I don't know about Intel. Microsoft did have a patch for this. The patch was the stupidest thing ever, since it had to be installed IN Windows. It was kind of an intermittant thing with the borderline chips, just keep on resetting the computer and eventually you will get it to boot in Windows. But with faster computers (like K6-III's) it would never make it to the desktop. In order to work around it, I would have to install the patch on an slower computer, and then copy the files the patch changed to the fast one and it would boot. Then install the patch on the fast one so it would stop complaining about version errors.
Ahh the good ol' days of Windows 95b. I set it up on my old K6-III and it ran stable (about 2 weeks uptime between reboots) for about 4 years. Sure, it had some issues, but it never just took a crap on itself and stop working like Windows 95 original/98/98SE/ME have done. Then I bought a new computer, which has Windows 2000. I then wiped the old (but working) Windows 95b install and put Windows 2000 on the K6-III and gave it to my uncle.
I still have a Pentium I running Windows 95b. Last summer I got it to the 49.71 day limit. During that time it was actually used too, mostly to talk to an ancient flatbed scanner and some web browsing in Opera 5.
A lot of that can still be done, provided you install Windows XP/2000 on a FAT32 partition (generally a good idea). Just make a DOS bootdisk on Windows 95b/98/98SE and away you go. For that reason, I'll probably *never* get rid of my Pentium I running Windows 95b because I never know when I'll need a DOS bootdisk, or DOS itself.
On most modern computers, you can use Knoppix to do the same thing. Knoppix is actually a lot more useful, because you get internet, a GUI, tons of useful tools, and it can talk to things like USB hard drives. But I still say install Windows 2000/XP on FAT32, because NTFS support in Linux (for writing to partitions, not reading) is still iffy.
Another bonus of Knoppix is that it can really impress people... "You just booted WHAT off of a CD?!? That's cool!"
I find it kind of funny how that website is so horribly broken outside of IE.
My guess would be Secondary Master with no slave. Primary slave would be bad, as it would be sharing a channel with your harddrive, so don't do it. It usually isn't a problem if it shares a channel with another CD/DVD/CDRW drive as long as you don't use the other drive while burning a disk, but you never know.
Well, you can always wipe the hard drive and reuse it next time you want to backup. Didn't think about that, now did you?
Also very fast, and you can set it and go. 80GB can be done in a couple of hours with no supervision. 80GB on DVD disks would mean over 20 disks, and you have to sit there and babysit the computer, feeding it a new disk every 15 minutes. Ugh.
I might have to try that again. Last time I messed around with Windows 98, fdisk wouldn't let me create very large partitions. Actually, fdisk just doesn't play will with larger drives. I also have a somewhat dated copy of Partition Magic (5.0?), that only lets me create FAT32 partitions of silghtly over 60GB, without spitting out errors.
Perhaps I'll try booting Knoppix just too see what happens. I just got another 80GB external drive that I haven't put anything on yet, so I can expirement around without the risk of losing data on the drive.
People like me with External hard disks. I'm still at a bit of a loss on how I am supposed to format a 120GB USB2.0 external disk so that it is one large 120GB partition, still have it readable/writeble by Windows 2000, and not use NTFS.
A most excellent reason to convert a computer to Dvorak. Your coworkers may hate you, but you'll have a computer that noone else is going to touch.
Maybe having Linux being "good enough for government work" isn't exactly the image we want Linux to have. Just like I think having Linux on cheap, disposable, sub-par computers from places like Wal-mart may not be the best thing either.
The real goal is to have people see Linux as a viable alternative, not a cheap Windows imitation or some eccentric thing the government uses.
Fitting a line to data in OpenOffice isn't that hard. It's actually done the same way as it is done in Excel. Check out the LINEST command. The syntax is identical. The GUI for it is a little different, but works. Getting to that GUI is a bit different though. In Excel there is a nice button on the toolbar in the default install to insert a function - but in OpenOffice it's buried in the menu (Insert menu -> Insert Function... or CTRL-F2 if you want). Of course, you can customize the toolbar in both OpenOffice and Excel, but so few people do so.
Nor does Knoppix.
But I think I get the idea behind the CD. People are willing to try out free software. Many are not willing to give up Windows just yet though.
So give them a taste of what's out there via free software that runs on top of Windows. Once they get used to the idea and see how great the software is, then they will be more willing to take the plunge and switch to running Linux.
Not hard at all, but then how do you get people to upgrade if their current word processor does everything they want? MS Office is Microsoft's bread and butter. They need people to upgrade every few years. They want a dependable revenue stream from Office users.
But even with all the tricks Microsoft has pulled (incompatible file formats, cutting support, not fixing bugs, etc.) - Microsoft still has the problem of a lot of people using Office 97 with no intentions of upgrading.
That's one of the nice things about free software, there isn't so much of a motive to break the older versions to force people to upgrade. But I suppose when you don't have to pay for the upgrade, less people are going to cling to the older version anyway.
I was talking to a friend the other day about a bunch of lab computers that my school is getting rid of - a bunch of old Pentium MMX's. He suggested turning them into a cluster. But after thinking about it, I realized that the group of about 10 old computers we had would consume more power - and would likely be considerably slower than a single one of the 2.4Ghz Dell's that replaced them. "What's the point?" I said.
Applying that here, the little VIA chips run at roughly the speed of a Celeron 500 or so, I'd say something like an AMD Athlon 3GHz would be just about as fast as about 6 of the VIA chips. So you are still saving some power, but as not as much as it would seem as first, as you need many low power chips to equal the speed of one faster chip. Not to mention power consumed by having more motherboards, network cards, switches, and other associated hardware.
Something to really look at is the cluster of G5's. The G5 chips use a lot less power than their x86 counterparts. I bet that cluster of G5's is probably right up there in terms of processing power per watt as this VIA super computer. And it's way more cool to boot.
And it's all after rebates, so basically take all those prices with a grain of salt. I hate rebates.
The reason the TI-82 had it, but the TI-85 lacked it is because the 82 is actually a newer calculator. The TI-85 was the 2nd graphing calculator TI produced, with the TI-81 being the first. By the time they made the TI-82 TI had figured out a few things like PxText(), multiple line history, and a much improved statistics package.
The TI-86 was the successor to the TI-85. I was pretty disappointed with it myself. It was basically a TI-85 with more memory. Some things like putting ", and other characters on the ALPHA-shifted keys wasn't done (which was desperately needed), some buttons were moved around for no reason, some functions renamed for no reason, the memory paging caused a significant performance hit, the TI-86's built in assembly language support was pretty buggy and clumsy while the TI-85's hacked assembly support was smooth and stable. The thing that pissed me off the most was the fact that the TI-86 did not include features that the already released TI-83 did, which was mostly statistics stuff. Even the add-on TI offered didn't include all of it, but most of it.
And I still use my TI-85 pretty much daily. I also use my HP-48G a lot too. I basically understand the TI-85 inside and out, I wish I could say the same for the HP (which is a much more complicated and harder to use calculator, but that is because it is far more powerful than the TI-85).
Funny that, as just about every tape player I have ever had starts eating tapes after a while. And when a tape gets eaten, that just sucks.
On the other hand, I have broken a few CD players over the years. Well, actually, I have busted a few cheapo CD-Rom drives, one really old CD boombox (which I may add the CD player outlasted both tape decks it had) and one car CD deck that survived 5 years and 45,000 miles of continous use (I don't listen to the radio). But overall, I would say that CD players are more reliable, plus when one goes it tends to not take the media with it.
Kodak has adapted quite well to changing technology. They sell digital cameras (including pro-level digital SLRs), online printing services, paper for inkjet printers, the printers themselves, software, and tons of other products that have to do with digital photography. And they still do film, and they will probably do it for a long time, though it will probably be a smaller and smaller division as the years go by. I would hardly expect Kodak to dissappear, unlike AOL or the RIAA.
Actually, the battery is now believed to be much, much older.
t hi an_battery.php
http://www.iranchamber.com/history/articles/par
Actually, what I would do is to program it to read the 1's and 0's from the beginning to the end of the disk. Once you have the raw data off of the entire disk, it would be a lot easier to try to decipher it as one big file on the computer. And if you can get a CD burner to write the 1's and 0's exactly like that, trivial to make a perfect copy.
And you are?
I'll leave it to the reader to figure that one out.