Jihad needs scientists
in [Design]
|
From: jmfbahciv on 21 Feb 2007 07:50 In article <ergc9g$jtg$7(a)blue.rahul.net>, kensmith(a)green.rahul.net (Ken Smith) wrote: >In article <45DB089A.DB973D69(a)hotmail.com>, >Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >> >> >>jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: >> >>> Another limitation is no PC systems are sold that can have multiple ttys >>> connected to it. >> >>You can have 4 serial ports. Possibly more. > >If you connect a serial to USB converter, you can easily end up with more >than 4. > 4 was unacceptable in 1968. What has the biz come to? /BAH
From: MassiveProng on 21 Feb 2007 08:05 On Wed, 21 Feb 07 12:15:25 GMT, jmfbahciv(a)aol.com Gave us: >In article <i70nt25k4ubuvllr029cun9ebu1e1bng0a(a)4ax.com>, > MassiveProng <MassiveProng(a)thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote: >>On Mon, 19 Feb 07 13:29:06 GMT, jmfbahciv(a)aol.com Gave us: >> >>>Not at all. OSes were handling the above problems in the 60s. >>>The reason virtual memory was invented was to solve the above >>>problem. >>> >> The swapping, in this case, CAUSES the interference. > >That has to do with severe memory management problems. No. It has to do with the fact that memory management has overhead, dipshit. >> He can run >>each alone and get the job done faster. Proving further that you >>don't know a goddamned thing about it. > >That says that the running task has enough memory. You aren't real bright.0 > The problem >has to do with having to keep vestiges of code, which isn't needed, >in core all the time. You are on the wrong track. WE KNOW that it can be done. The declaration was that it cannot be done without costs that are greater than running them sequentially. > One of the asspects of PC software is >that nobody ever learned about segments and getting them when >the code is needed and then removing them when the code is no >longer required. There you go again thinking nobody in the world but you knows anything about computing. >> Not only that, but even on my 2GB machine, Billy swaps. > >that's just plain ridiculous if you aren't using all the >code segements. BillyWare NEVER uses all the available RAM. Never has... never will likely. > It tells me that the OS doesn't know how >to delete stale segments during its cleanup sweeps..it probably >doesn't have any cleanup sweeps. You probably are so far behind the times that you know nothing about modern paradigms. Tell us what the instruction set for the Itanium is referred to as? >> So even in >>that case, the tasks would finish faster separately. > >If you never use a function, there isn't any reason to have it taking >up memory space. You are completely lost on the wrong track. > The problem with PC coding practices is that >the newyoungthings have always believed that code, which might >possibly be executed 20 years from now, has to be resident in >core. What a dip, you are.
From: MassiveProng on 21 Feb 2007 08:09 On Wed, 21 Feb 07 12:24:29 GMT, jmfbahciv(a)aol.com Gave us: >Windows is not an OS. >> You are not a computer person. You're an absolute idiot.
From: MassiveProng on 21 Feb 2007 08:09 On Wed, 21 Feb 07 12:24:29 GMT, jmfbahciv(a)aol.com Gave us: >There is more to an OS than the first step which is called installation. >Maintenance of the system is the most ongoing important task, especially >the data. How profound! NOT!
From: MassiveProng on 21 Feb 2007 08:12
On Wed, 21 Feb 07 12:31:03 GMT, jmfbahciv(a)aol.com Gave us: >In article <erf2nv$39q$7(a)blue.rahul.net>, > kensmith(a)green.rahul.net (Ken Smith) wrote: >>In article <ereo6m$8ss_009(a)s883.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>, >> <jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote: >>>In article <87irdym3zz.fsf(a)nonospaz.fatphil.org>, >>> Phil Carmody <thefatphil_demunged(a)yahoo.co.uk> wrote: >>>>Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> writes: >>>>> MassiveProng wrote: >>>>> >>>>> > I can boot Linux from a DVD and RUN it all day long, and I don't need >to >>>do >>>>> > ANY installation! >>>>> >>>>> That sounds interesting. >>>>> >>>>> Where can I get one ? >>>> >>>>Ubuntu, Kubuntu, Xubuntu all come as live CDs >>>>Gentoo does too. >>>>Knoppix was the original popular live CD. >>> >>>What does the OS, running from a CD, use for its scratch pad? >>><snip> >> >>It uses the RAM of the computer. They like to have quite a lot of RAM. > >A RAM can't be the scratchpad. That would slow down processing >enormously. > You're an idiot. Ever heard of a RAM disc? It is an area of RAM which is NEVER accessed by the OS in the way the non-set aside RAM is. Can a dolt like you even grasp that concept? |