The Perfect Computer - 36 bits?
|
From: Rich Alderson on 2 Apr 2007 16:03 jmfbahciv(a)aol.com writes: > Has it been verified that Vista cannot read MS' older formats? No, it hasn't, and it won't be. I'm running Vista on my desktop at work, in an XP shop. I'd be dead in the water if the [omitted] claim were true. -- Rich Alderson | /"\ ASCII ribbon | news(a)alderson.users.panix.com | \ / campaign against | "You get what anybody gets. You get a lifetime." | x HTML mail and | --Death, of the Endless | / \ postings |
From: Frank McCoy on 2 Apr 2007 16:06 In alt.folklore.computers krw <krw(a)att.bizzzz> wrote: >In article <a082135mvbkatdo80f6fm2cs4kgt5t8kpf(a)4ax.com>, >mccoyf(a)millcomm.com says... >> In alt.folklore.computers Brian Inglis >> <Brian.Inglis(a)SystematicSW.Invalid> wrote: >> >> >Buffer overflow is a bug caused by amateurs masquerading as programmers. >> >> ... Or deliberately caused by hackers trying to break a system. > >No, if there wasn't a loose nut behind the original keyboard the >hacker wouldn't have a chance at a buffer overflow. The fact that it >*can* be overflowed shows a poor design. Point. -- _____ / ' / ™ ,-/-, __ __. ____ /_ (_/ / (_(_/|_/ / <_/ <_
From: Rich Alderson on 2 Apr 2007 16:14 Brian Inglis <Brian.Inglis(a)SystematicSW.Invalid> writes: > On Thu, 29 Mar 07 13:17:03 GMT in alt.folklore.computers, > jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: >> That's funny because 11s were an intricate piece of the disk >> systems. There is no way a VAX would be the front end of the HSC. You're talking about the little LSI-11 in the HSC-50's, right? Not a user- oriented system and therefore not relevant to whether someone could order a new 11 from Digital at or after a certain point in time. > They stuck MASSbusses into the VAX backplane. > And eventually allowed VAX onto the HSC; 11s never had that option. I know you don't mean it, but it looks as though you are claiming that 11's couldn't have Massbi (at least there's an implied syllogism to that effect in your statements). -- Rich Alderson | /"\ ASCII ribbon | news(a)alderson.users.panix.com | \ / campaign against | "You get what anybody gets. You get a lifetime." | x HTML mail and | --Death, of the Endless | / \ postings |
From: Peter Flass on 2 Apr 2007 19:18 krw wrote: > In article <4610138f$0$24164$e4fe514c(a)dreader14.news.xs4all.nl>, > invalid(a)invalid.invalid says... > >>Andrew Swallow wrote: >> >>>krw wrote: >>> >>>>>VAX/VMS the reliable alternative to Windows PCs. >>>> >>>>You're dreaming. That bus left a long time ago. >>> >>>Probably, it is Linux that will have to clean up the mess Microsoft >>>makes. >> >>Linux is a rather big mess itself. For some unknown reasons many >>distributions have chosen to go the Microsoft way; horribly bloated, >>resource hungry and unstable. >> > > Just a guess, but perhaps that's what people really want. The ones > who don't are generally savvy enough to strip it down (or build it > up) to their liking. > > I know it's heretical, but I believe Linux' problem is much simpler; > compatibility. > It's pretty compatible with most unix systems I'm familar with;-) Assuming you mean compatibility with Micro$hit, Linux/unisx follows standards, for the most part. The requirement for compatibility is on the other side. It's up to us, as users, to demand this. The OpenXML flap shows that this works.
From: krw on 2 Apr 2007 20:41
In article <46118f41$0$24693$4c368faf(a)roadrunner.com>, Peter_Flass(a)Yahoo.com says... > krw wrote: > > In article <4610138f$0$24164$e4fe514c(a)dreader14.news.xs4all.nl>, > > invalid(a)invalid.invalid says... > > > >>Andrew Swallow wrote: > >> > >>>krw wrote: > >>> > >>>>>VAX/VMS the reliable alternative to Windows PCs. > >>>> > >>>>You're dreaming. That bus left a long time ago. > >>> > >>>Probably, it is Linux that will have to clean up the mess Microsoft > >>>makes. > >> > >>Linux is a rather big mess itself. For some unknown reasons many > >>distributions have chosen to go the Microsoft way; horribly bloated, > >>resource hungry and unstable. > >> > > > > Just a guess, but perhaps that's what people really want. The ones > > who don't are generally savvy enough to strip it down (or build it > > up) to their liking. > > > > I know it's heretical, but I believe Linux' problem is much simpler; > > compatibility. > > > > It's pretty compatible with most unix systems I'm familar with;-) Well, I suppose that's better than Win. ;-) > Assuming you mean compatibility with Micro$hit, Linux/unisx follows > standards, for the most part. The requirement for compatibility is on > the other side. It's up to us, as users, to demand this. The OpenXML > flap shows that this works. > Hardware. I mean compatible with cameras, scanners, printers, graphics cards, sound cards, and the sorts. It's a cop out to blame the user. If there is any doubt in hardware^Wtoys working the user will stay with what's known. -- Keith |