Jihad needs scientists
in [Design]
|
From: MassiveProng on 16 Feb 2007 19:21 On Fri, 16 Feb 07 12:36:30 GMT, jmfbahciv(a)aol.com Gave us: > >What would be the best thing for the computer system biz right now >is for the hardware to hit the brick wall. Then resources will >be available for decent coding work. At the moment any slop >is acceptable because there is enough hardware capacity to handle >it. What an utterly retarded remark. There is SLOP in your skull cavity. Pig slop.
From: MassiveProng on 16 Feb 2007 19:24 On Fri, 16 Feb 07 12:36:30 GMT, jmfbahciv(a)aol.com Gave us: >GAWD. I HOPE NOT. All we've been having is hardware break >throughs. This has all had the direct effect of coding slop. If you were any more stupid, I'd swear you were merely trolling.
From: MassiveProng on 16 Feb 2007 19:25 On Fri, 16 Feb 07 12:36:30 GMT, jmfbahciv(a)aol.com Gave us: >Oh, jeez. You are too impressed with small potatoes. It should >be keeping up with 1000 19200 baud serial streams. > You're an absolute idiot.
From: MassiveProng on 16 Feb 2007 19:26 On Fri, 16 Feb 07 12:52:25 GMT, jmfbahciv(a)aol.com Gave us: >>We just had another wonderful experience with XP. Characters pumped into >>the serial port may take up to 5 seconds before a DOS application running >>under XP gets to see them. > >I would expect that. Why aren't you expecting that? Why would you expect that a piece of hardware passing a data stream would be delayed by a machine in being processed? Don't just mouth off, explain, ditz! Did you take computing in Russia during the fifties?
From: MassiveProng on 16 Feb 2007 19:30
On Fri, 16 Feb 07 14:07:30 GMT, jmfbahciv(a)aol.com Gave us: > >There is a huge difference between tasking and being able to >interrupt any task at any time and resuming it seamlessly >later and not being able to start another task until the >previous one is completely finished including EOFing the >files. Batch process mentality bullshit. |