Just plain fucked...
in [Design]
|
Prev: Freq. Independent Phase Shifter
Next: Please, DO NOT forget the only thing that matters on this planet........................……..
From: FatBytestard on 13 May 2010 08:52 On Thu, 13 May 2010 08:21:54 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terrell(a)earthlink.net> wrote: > >JosephKK wrote: >> >> On Tue, 11 May 2010 18:48:17 -0700, Copacetic >> <Copacetic(a)iseverythingalright.org> wrote: >> >> >On Tue, 11 May 2010 03:30:14 -0700, "JosephKK"<quiettechblue(a)yahoo.com> >> >wrote: >> > >> >> back then it was to get 32 bit softs you had to >> >>give up 8 bit softs. >> > >> > More bullshit. >> > >> > My MFM drives worked fine on a 486 as long as it had the slot for it. >> > >> > It also booted. Guess what was loaded on it. >> >> And just what does the then already obsolete hardware have to do with the >> design of the software? > > > That must have been a 'REALLY' slow 486. You're a complete and utter retard. > Some early IDE drives were >too slow to boot and locked up the motherboards. Now, you are a goddamned idiot that knows nothing about computers. YOU had problems and YOU guessed at what the cause was. It is obvious, however, that YOU were an idiot, then, and now. IDE was FASTER than ANY MFM drive ever made, idiot. > The same with a 16 bit >MFM controller. You are a complete idiot. > I had to turn on every time wasting function in the >BIOS in some computers, when replacing motherboards. Which was an even MORE retarded "solution", idiot. > In some cases, >people had no choice but to replace their hard drive, too. Some 386 >motherboards wouldn't work at full speed with a MFM drive. You had to >set the CPU to the lowest speed the board supported to use MFM drives. You are a complete dumbfuck.
From: MooseFET on 13 May 2010 09:31 On May 12, 7:57 pm, "JosephKK"<quiettechb...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > On Tue, 11 May 2010 18:48:17 -0700, Copacetic > > <Copace...(a)iseverythingalright.org> wrote: > >On Tue, 11 May 2010 03:30:14 -0700, "JosephKK"<quiettechb...(a)yahoo.com> > >wrote: > > >> back then it was to get 32 bit softs you had to > >>give up 8 bit softs. > > > More bullshit. > > > My MFM drives worked fine on a 486 as long as it had the slot for it.. > > > It also booted. Guess what was loaded on it. > > And just what does the then already obsolete hardware have to do with the > design of the software? I have met many people who made a good living doing software to run on machines from the stone age. If the guy with the check book wants software to run on his 8080 machines, there are people willing to take the money.
From: Archimedes' Lever on 14 May 2010 05:10 On Thu, 13 May 2010 14:22:51 -0700, John Larkin <jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: >Windows is such a little-understood mess, hundreds of millions of >lines of tangled, hacked, inter-dependent code, Not any more, idiot.
From: Martin Brown on 14 May 2010 05:22 On 14/05/2010 10:10, Archimedes' Lever wrote: > On Thu, 13 May 2010 14:22:51 -0700, John Larkin > <jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: > >> Windows is such a little-understood mess, hundreds of millions of >> lines of tangled, hacked, inter-dependent code, > > Not any more, idiot. It is too early to tell whether Win7 will be considered a decent vintage or not. Though it is certainly moving in the right direction. Vista was without doubt a total dog and is condemned to obscurity long before XP which is still in wide industrial use. Many big corporates ignored Vista completely - no benefit changing the OS and much hassle. For all its annoyances XP was good enough. And the last good major version of Doze, just as Office 2003 was the last good version of that product. It remains to be seen if Win7 will win out completely or whether XP will hold onto a niche in the ultra compact portable arena and certain industrial applications. My money is on the latter. Too many pieces of big kit will not work under Win7 compatibility mode for the want of dedicated device drivers the instrument makers are not willing to develop or supply for old kit. In the consumer market HP scanners epitomise the lack of support for old gear on new OS's. Regards, Martin Brown
From: MooseFET on 14 May 2010 09:54
On May 14, 2:22 am, Martin Brown <|||newspam...(a)nezumi.demon.co.uk> wrote: > On 14/05/2010 10:10, Archimedes' Lever wrote: > > > On Thu, 13 May 2010 14:22:51 -0700, John Larkin > > <jjlar...(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: > > >> Windows is such a little-understood mess, hundreds of millions of > >> lines of tangled, hacked, inter-dependent code, > > > Not any more, idiot. > > It is too early to tell whether Win7 will be considered a decent vintage > or not. Though it is certainly moving in the right direction. > > Vista was without doubt a total dog and is condemned to obscurity long > before XP which is still in wide industrial use. Many big corporates > ignored Vista completely - no benefit changing the OS and much hassle. From what I am seeing, Changing from XP to 7 is just a bad idea. From what I have heard, Windows 7 is mostly Vista. MS just didn't call it "Vist something" because Vista had gained such a bad name for being a dog. > For all its annoyances XP was good enough. And the last good major > version of Doze, just as Office 2003 was the last good version of that > product. It remains to be seen if Win7 will win out completely or > whether XP will hold onto a niche in the ultra compact portable arena > and certain industrial applications. My money is on the latter. I would take the XP staying side of the bet too. If some is forced to move to Windows-7, I strongly suggest that they get one of the versions that comes with the virtual XP. The one advantage Windows 7 has is that you can back up your XP with it. You can get this same advantage for free with a Linux version but many people panic (complete with screaming "Burma") when someone suggests that a Linux solution would be good for them. > Too many pieces of big kit will not work under Win7 compatibility mode > for the want of dedicated device drivers the instrument makers are not > willing to develop or supply for old kit. In the consumer market HP > scanners epitomise the lack of support for old gear on new OS's. So far, the folks running Windows-7 where I work, still can't print with correct scaling on any of the printers. One of them is having weird network problems where sometimes it just can't see some of the servers. We are porting our software over to Windows-7. This means that effort that could be making new product is being burned up. I can expect the conversion process to take many months. Already, it appears that a few features will just be abandoned. |