Boy, no wonder Firefox consumes so much power. All those extra screens....
And all the extra processing that goes into checking that firefox is running. Maybe it would be better said that win10 creator edition sucks so bad it loses over 3 hours of battery life when running quality software.
And yet the numbers are clear that Edge is superior. There's no denying that Edge drains the battery a lot less. You would rightly criticize anyone who denied the facts that humans are causing global warming. Why, then, do you get to deny these facts?
The numbers are clear that a 0.1HP gas engined unicycle runs much further on a gallon of gas than a bus, so it is clearly superior.
Congrats! You're now running Windows 10 Vulnerable Edition!
Funniest quote I've seen in a week. Glad my coffee was on the desk....
Personally, I trust Microsoft (ever so slightly) more than some random hacker.
Personally, I don't trust Microsoft. They don't know or care about me other than as a potential revenue source, both via license fees and data gathering. That latter puts them in the same ballpark as random hackers.
And, the reality of it is, despite having rebooted itself for updates TWICE while I was actively using it (and inside my Active Hours, none the less), Windows 10 has been more stable, faster, and more reliable than any version I've used before it; and that includes everything from 3.1 on.
Well, that's really elevating the bar!
Note that a properly configured XP system blows away Win7 and Win10, and is significantly more secure than either of the latter out of the box. Such an XP system is stripped down to less than 10 running processes based on my vaguest memories of the system. No open ports. As long as you don't run MS software on it, you're relatively safe. IE is just an open invitation to System, and Office macros... well we all know how safe those documents are. Then again, I believe you can configure most of Win7 in a similar fashion with similar results, although I've never bothered to go that far with it. Running a linux desktop is easier.
Every gallon of gas has federal tax on it. An insufficient amount, given the state of our infrastructure, but a federal tax none the less. Then there's also the corporate tax applied to every single thing you buy.
So you admit the customer has no choice here but to "accept" blatantly unfair terms and conditions that contradict the nature of the product being sold?
No, they can purchase the full-fare ticket and be subject to different and, for the case being discussed, better terms. There's always the chance the plane will be canceled for a host of reasons. If you buy a bottom fare ticket, you are subject to some of the terms others are not. If you absolutely have to get somewhere, don't buy a bottom of the barrel ticket during peak travel times. If you don't have the common sense to do so, well...
You observe some justified problems with mass transit, but your conclusions are suspect. For mass transit to really work requires (sub)urban planning to actually be done and then followed through on, and will result in some significantly different layouts than currently exist. Mass transit really requires main arteries and connection points. One of the best I've seen is Paris, with local and "long haul" lines and cross-line connection points.
IIRC, OS/2 actually used ring0 for kernel only, as all drivers were moved to ring1. I remember some issues with that back then, when they forced drivers out of kernel space. It's what allowed all that modularity to occur. Again, it's what I vaguely recall. I didn't write drivers back then.:) Or maybe that was undertaken for the Workplace Shell OS that was only demoed and died?
As for the pre-emptive bit, OS/2 truly was preemptive. One thing I really liked was the way you could tweak thread priorities and process priorities and actually continue running everything even if 1 process/thread was throttled on some I/O. Win NT is still time sliced, and likely will always be, although that time slice is now down to about 16ms, last I looked. The time slice along with certain almost single threaded operations (vestiges of GDI I'm sure) still cause Windows 7 et al to effectively lock up whenever you do something interesting, like open a large file over a slow network connection in Office or Outlook. Maybe they've finally fixed this? Who knows. Apple still has the disk spin up issue delaying access, instead of only waiting, if necessary, on the one disk you're accessing.
Well, it was less than half the cost of just one of the SGI XZ (or Elan? long time ago) graphics cards that was on the same purchase. We got a deal because we bought 2 systems plus 2 cards - $25K per card. Then again, everything was bulk buy on the 486s too. The 486 was a work computer, but wow did it totally skew my expectations for my home systems for years.
It was a Gateway, 486. EISA motherboard. Absolute cluster attempting to run Windows with Smartdrive on that thing. Smartdrive would wipe the EISA configuration on startup. Installed OS/2 and never looked back. Win NT 3.1 was an unusable mess. Win NT 3.5 was almost as bad. OS/2 2.0 wasn't awesome either. Yes, I went through more than 1 round of fun with those systems.
That's actually still in question. If it's purely licensed, then as long as I hold the license, the vendor is obligated to provide me a working copy. If that's not true, then it's a copy PLUS the license to use it, in which case it's more like a padlock and key - I own both parts and am free to do with those parts what I will.
Now a *subscription* actually does what you say. That's a whole different mechanism that doesn't need historical revisionism.
Yes, that's true, but I included up to the pre 2000 era because I think even in the 90s there was plenty of 'it should run forever' ethic in the software world.
Sun, IBM, Tandem, Cray, SGI, DEC, the list is long. What they all had in common was they did not run MS OSes. They also were not exactly home computers, even the smaller Sun/SGI boxes.
If, if, if.... I obviously cannot answer any of those questions, other than IBM had already thrown in the towel by 96. MS's 2GB memory request in Office 95 pretty much killed off any chance OS/2 had in the market.
Although we can quibble, that's an update, not a release. There's a distinct difference. However, that aside, it's still amazing how technically forward it was compared to, say, Windows NT.
I'm well familiar with its exorbitant pricing schemes. But, back on topic, I'm sure the article is correct, it is 28% better than what they claimed last year. It could also be 50% better, because a percentage of nothing is...
highly doubtful as pre internet in 1992 was more or less always on BBS'es that did little more and often time less than the most basic bbs
yea great you ping ponged machines during college classes, called it the internet post 1995 when it was kewl, but really you didnt, lets be honest here
Having been on pre-92, and doing significantly more than that. mail, talk, finger, MUDs, file sharing and development, posting on "boards". Hmmm, sounds a lot like today's internet, actually, just with a different GUI slapped on it.
Slashdot Mirror
What about all the people (younger folks especially) who are no longer buying/using desktop computers since their phones do everything they need?
I love watching young people spend 10 minutes to send 2 messages back and forth.
So Google's Android profit over the last 7 or so years equals 1 quarter of Apple's profit? I'm sure they're ecstatic.
If you want an ad blocker, then you should install the proper extension:
You're right:
Microsoft is pretty much all you can use if you need things like java. Both Chrome and Firefox have broken support for certain plugins intentionally.
Who runs anything in java in the browser?
That's a lot of fun when your banks deposit app runs on Java and you can no longer deposit checks.
Sounds like it's time for a new bank to me.
Boy, no wonder Firefox consumes so much power. All those extra screens....
And all the extra processing that goes into checking that firefox is running. Maybe it would be better said that win10 creator edition sucks so bad it loses over 3 hours of battery life when running quality software.
And yet the numbers are clear that Edge is superior. There's no denying that Edge drains the battery a lot less. You would rightly criticize anyone who denied the facts that humans are causing global warming. Why, then, do you get to deny these facts?
The numbers are clear that a 0.1HP gas engined unicycle runs much further on a gallon of gas than a bus, so it is clearly superior.
Congrats! You're now running Windows 10 Vulnerable Edition!
Funniest quote I've seen in a week. Glad my coffee was on the desk....
Personally, I trust Microsoft (ever so slightly) more than some random hacker.
Personally, I don't trust Microsoft. They don't know or care about me other than as a potential revenue source, both via license fees and data gathering. That latter puts them in the same ballpark as random hackers.
And, the reality of it is, despite having rebooted itself for updates TWICE while I was actively using it (and inside my Active Hours, none the less), Windows 10 has been more stable, faster, and more reliable than any version I've used before it; and that includes everything from 3.1 on.
Well, that's really elevating the bar!
Note that a properly configured XP system blows away Win7 and Win10, and is significantly more secure than either of the latter out of the box. Such an XP system is stripped down to less than 10 running processes based on my vaguest memories of the system. No open ports. As long as you don't run MS software on it, you're relatively safe. IE is just an open invitation to System, and Office macros... well we all know how safe those documents are. Then again, I believe you can configure most of Win7 in a similar fashion with similar results, although I've never bothered to go that far with it. Running a linux desktop is easier.
Every gallon of gas has federal tax on it. An insufficient amount, given the state of our infrastructure, but a federal tax none the less. Then there's also the corporate tax applied to every single thing you buy.
So you admit the customer has no choice here but to "accept" blatantly unfair terms and conditions that contradict the nature of the product being sold?
No, they can purchase the full-fare ticket and be subject to different and, for the case being discussed, better terms. There's always the chance the plane will be canceled for a host of reasons. If you buy a bottom fare ticket, you are subject to some of the terms others are not. If you absolutely have to get somewhere, don't buy a bottom of the barrel ticket during peak travel times. If you don't have the common sense to do so, well...
You didn't notice back in the 80s because prior to airline deregulation, flights took off whether they were empty or not.
You observe some justified problems with mass transit, but your conclusions are suspect. For mass transit to really work requires (sub)urban planning to actually be done and then followed through on, and will result in some significantly different layouts than currently exist. Mass transit really requires main arteries and connection points. One of the best I've seen is Paris, with local and "long haul" lines and cross-line connection points.
For the lottery, some see it as a cheap daydream. That's just a matter of personal preferences. If it's your retirement plan, that's a problem.
It is my retirement plan 0. However, being pragmatic, Plan A is to work and save. Plan 0 just has the potential of shortening the time period.
IIRC, OS/2 actually used ring0 for kernel only, as all drivers were moved to ring1. I remember some issues with that back then, when they forced drivers out of kernel space. It's what allowed all that modularity to occur. Again, it's what I vaguely recall. I didn't write drivers back then. :) Or maybe that was undertaken for the Workplace Shell OS that was only demoed and died?
As for the pre-emptive bit, OS/2 truly was preemptive. One thing I really liked was the way you could tweak thread priorities and process priorities and actually continue running everything even if 1 process/thread was throttled on some I/O. Win NT is still time sliced, and likely will always be, although that time slice is now down to about 16ms, last I looked. The time slice along with certain almost single threaded operations (vestiges of GDI I'm sure) still cause Windows 7 et al to effectively lock up whenever you do something interesting, like open a large file over a slow network connection in Office or Outlook. Maybe they've finally fixed this? Who knows. Apple still has the disk spin up issue delaying access, instead of only waiting, if necessary, on the one disk you're accessing.
Well, it was less than half the cost of just one of the SGI XZ (or Elan? long time ago) graphics cards that was on the same purchase. We got a deal because we bought 2 systems plus 2 cards - $25K per card. Then again, everything was bulk buy on the 486s too. The 486 was a work computer, but wow did it totally skew my expectations for my home systems for years.
It was a Gateway, 486. EISA motherboard. Absolute cluster attempting to run Windows with Smartdrive on that thing. Smartdrive would wipe the EISA configuration on startup. Installed OS/2 and never looked back. Win NT 3.1 was an unusable mess. Win NT 3.5 was almost as bad. OS/2 2.0 wasn't awesome either. Yes, I went through more than 1 round of fun with those systems.
I guess it depends on your standards. If your standards are low enough, then all of humanity is really smart.
"Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that." - George Carlin
"A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it." - K
That's actually still in question. If it's purely licensed, then as long as I hold the license, the vendor is obligated to provide me a working copy. If that's not true, then it's a copy PLUS the license to use it, in which case it's more like a padlock and key - I own both parts and am free to do with those parts what I will.
Now a *subscription* actually does what you say. That's a whole different mechanism that doesn't need historical revisionism.
Yes, that's true, but I included up to the pre 2000 era because I think even in the 90s there was plenty of 'it should run forever' ethic in the software world.
Sun, IBM, Tandem, Cray, SGI, DEC, the list is long. What they all had in common was they did not run MS OSes. They also were not exactly home computers, even the smaller Sun/SGI boxes.
In 93 I had 64MB RAM and 2 1GB disks. It ran OS/2 2.11 very very well. Don't ask how much that cost....
If, if, if.... I obviously cannot answer any of those questions, other than IBM had already thrown in the towel by 96. MS's 2GB memory request in Office 95 pretty much killed off any chance OS/2 had in the market.
Although we can quibble, that's an update, not a release. There's a distinct difference. However, that aside, it's still amazing how technically forward it was compared to, say, Windows NT.
I'm well familiar with its exorbitant pricing schemes. But, back on topic, I'm sure the article is correct, it is 28% better than what they claimed last year. It could also be 50% better, because a percentage of nothing is...
There were these really cool things called Archie and Gopher in 92. WWW was just getting started at that time.
highly doubtful as pre internet in 1992 was more or less always on BBS'es that did little more and often time less than the most basic bbs
yea great you ping ponged machines during college classes, called it the internet post 1995 when it was kewl, but really you didnt, lets be honest here
Having been on pre-92, and doing significantly more than that. mail, talk, finger, MUDs, file sharing and development, posting on "boards". Hmmm, sounds a lot like today's internet, actually, just with a different GUI slapped on it.