 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> Darren New wrote:
>> Have you forgotten what we're discussing at this point?
>
> look at the size of this goddamn thread, man!
241 posts to be exact (242 with this one). At least it got long and not
deep. Thunderbird makes it hard to see posts when they get too high in
the thread nesting...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
nemesis wrote:
> I've opened a beer and so, cheers!
And same to you! I'm off to see family on the other coast in a couple
hours. Enjoy your vacation! :-)
--
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
On what day did God create the body thetans?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
And lo on Tue, 12 Feb 2008 19:12:37 -0000, Darren New <dne### [at] san rrcom>
did spake, saying:
> Phil Cook wrote:
>> and yet prior to Windows 95 there were quite the number of competing
>> OSs.
>
> Afterwards, too. Just not on the same hardware. And not really offering
> a whole lot more.
True, but I think that period was really the turning point.
>>> Apple requires you to buy new hardware, so it's not purely a software
>>> decision.
>> Yet everyone loves their monopolistic ways :-)
>
> And the software is subsidized by the hardware, which *would* be
> monopolistic if Apple split into two companies.
At least now it's possible to install non-Apple software on an Apple with
greater ease.
> And it *still* costs roughly the same for Apple software as MS software,
> in spite of the subsidy.
'Companies charge what the market will bear' so often misunderstood
--
Phil Cook
--
I once tried to be apathetic, but I just couldn't be bothered
http://flipc.blogspot.com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> I was programming in Pascal - why?
>
> Fair enough. Pascal can be fairly safe if you're not using too many
> dynamic structures.
This is a good point - on my Acorn, one typo in assembler, or in basic when
you're playing about with memory addresses (which usually you were when
developing desktop applications) and you'd get the dreaded "Internal Error:
Abort on data transfer" or such and be forced to *reset*. Fortunately you
need to work *really* hard to achieve the same on Windows :-)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Orchid XP v7 <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
> Heh. Reminds me of my first attempt to use Perl for CGI. I tried to run
> it, and it didn't work. After a while I gave up waiting and closed IE. I
> did some more poking and prodding of the code before the lead tech came
> over and said "hey, you've using up 100% CPU on the webserver".
Web servers which are configured properly will automatically kill
any CGI process which is taking too long to terminate. Apparently
that one wasn't.
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> And you guys are trying to convince me my mum could use Linux .... ha!
>
> I wouldn't not recommend Linux for your mother. I would recommend you
> buy her a Mac mini.
Yes I heard good things about those from non-tech people, mainly via my
sister who does graphics/arts stuff. However, the mac mini is twice the
price of the PC my mum has with XP, and she is happy with XP because she
knows (roughly!) how to use it. Maybe when she has some more money to
spend, or some hardware breaks she will consider it.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
> > Now, try to google without an internet connection because you just
> > failed to install the driver necessary for the internet connection.
> Go over to the next machine and google it.
It was the only computer at that home. The next computer accessible by
me was kilometers away.
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> Give you mom Ubuntu and she'll never ever touch a command-line, except for
> running "pppoeconf" and providing ADSL login and password on installation.
She has a wireless router/modem that I set up for her downstairs - so it
would just be a case of configuring the wireless USB stick to pick up an IP
address with DHCP .... is that easy?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Eero Ahonen <aer### [at] removethiszbxtnetinvalid> wrote:
> Vista's getting a lot of angry comments now and it hasn't got it's
> footprint out (yet). If MS broke backward compatibility totally now, how
> would you think Vista would be selling?
I don't believe too many people would complain if Vista broke
compatibility with Windows 3.1 and DOS (which would be approximately
the same thing MacOS X has done).
(OTOH, I don't really know if Vista actually has done that. I assume
it hasn't.)
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> [Last I heard - and I don't have any hard data for this - the guys you
>> named aren't exactly short of cash.]
>
> They're not, but what does that have to do with hardware support? Dell,
> HP, IBM/Lenovo all sell machines with Linux pre-installed on them. It
> would see that this would be hard to do if hardware support "wasn't there
> yet".
Well, if you decide exactly what hardware goes in, you can select only
supported hardware. Easy. :-D
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
