16 Jun
2013
16 Jun
'13
2:31 p.m.
Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2013 00:20:34 -0400 (EDT)
From: Mouse <mouse at Rodents-Montreal.ORG>
I don't consider time spent discussing the hobby
to be wasted. If you do,
as your wording seems to imply, I have to wonder, why are you here?
For the occasional post that is actually related to 'Classic Computers', as
opposed to the endless kvetching about (other) people, 'PeeCees', M$ etc.,
recurring intolerant arguments about the 'best' way to do anything, vanity
posts from folks who think we're interested in their opinions about just
about everything, etc.
It just seems that seven or eight people have 'taken over' the list as a
forum for their often lengthy and OT opinions and arguments, while I see
familiar people with much to contribute leaving and appearing on other lists
instead and citing the above 'noise' as the reason (not to mention the folks
still here begging them to keep it down and on topic).
A shame IMO.
m
16 Jun
16 Jun
2:54 p.m.
On Sun, 16 Jun 2013, MikeS wrote:
On Sun, 16 Jun 2013 Mouse wrote:
Oh no you don't.
I've been here long enough to have witnessed first hand that no matter
-what- computer-related topic comes up, /someone/ on the list is going to
take offense to the topic under discussion. If someone brings up old Macs,
someone who prefers to discuss only big iron, DEC systems, Sun gear, or
::gasp:: /modern Macs/ gets annoyed. If people are discussing DEC Alphas,
someone who only likes VAX or PDP systems gets annoyed. The very same
thing occurs with other subjects, such as MS-DOS (and all the 3rd party
DOS clones), old versions of Windows* and Microsoft in general, PCs (I
myself consider the term "PeeCee" mildly offensive and derogatory on
_many_ levels, but at the same time you don't see me ranting about it),
microcontrollers, emulators, reproductions of Big Iron or Micros with
modern parts, ..., etc.
...and don't even get me started on the Big Iron/UNIX/etc vs Micros, or as
I've seen some Big Iron types here refer to as "toy computers".
Mike...keep it up and I'll start quoting Rodney King...
*I haven't seen any major discussions of modern versions of Windows, other
than /maybe/ discussing incompatibilities with certain emulators or
maintenance/disk imaging utilities - which themselves are very much "on
topic". Maybe we need a thread about just how much Windows 8 sucks
compared to Windows 3.x or OS/2 Warp? ;)
I don't consider time spent discussing the
hobby to be wasted. If you
do, as your wording seems to imply, I have to wonder, why are you here?
For the occasional post that is actually related to 'Classic Computers',
as opposed to the endless kvetching about (other) people, 'PeeCees', M$
etc., recurring intolerant arguments about the 'best' way to do
anything, vanity posts from folks who think we're interested in their
opinions about just about everything, etc.
It just seems that seven or eight people have 'taken over' the list as a
forum for their often lengthy and OT opinions and arguments, while I see
familiar people with much to contribute leaving and appearing on other
lists instead and citing the above 'noise' as the reason (not to mention
the folks still here begging them to keep it down and on topic).
A shame IMO. 
4:37 p.m.
On Sun, 16 Jun 2013, Tothwolf wrote:
*I haven't seen any major discussions of modern versions of Windows, other
than /maybe/ discussing incompatibilities with certain emulators or
maintenance/disk imaging utilities - which themselves are very much "on
topic". Maybe we need a thread about just how much Windows 8 sucks
compared to Windows 3.x or OS/2 Warp? ;)
I take offense to that. NT 4 is far superior. ;)
--
Cory Smelosky
http://gewt.net Personal stuff
http://gimme-sympathy.org Projects
4:51 p.m.
On Sun, 16 Jun 2013, Cory Smelosky wrote:
On Sun, 16 Jun 2013, Tothwolf wrote:
Certainly. On the other hand, at least with say Windows 3.1, you could
actually fix something if the OS got screwed up, vs everything being done
in the registry. One of my only real gripes with NT4 is the start menu
being extremely difficult to modify compared to say Win 95 OSR2 and
later...well, that and getting the service packs installed properly and
with the other correct updates done in between was also a real pain.
*I haven't seen any major discussions of
modern versions of Windows,
other than /maybe/ discussing incompatibilities with certain emulators
or maintenance/disk imaging utilities - which themselves are very much
"on topic". Maybe we need a thread about just how much Windows 8 sucks
compared to Windows 3.x or OS/2 Warp? ;)
I take offense to that. NT 4 is far superior. ;)
4:59 p.m.
On Sun, 16 Jun 2013, Tothwolf wrote:
On Sun, 16 Jun 2013, Cory Smelosky wrote:
Willing to agree with that. I've found however that NT 4 is a LOT less of
a kludge than 2000. 2000 is far too webby for my liking.
The NT 4 kernel was nice. ;)
--
Cory Smelosky
http://gewt.net Personal stuff
http://gimme-sympathy.org Projects
On Sun, 16 Jun 2013, Tothwolf wrote:
Certainly. On the other hand, at least with say Windows 3.1, you could
actually fix something if the OS got screwed up, vs everything being done
in the registry. One of my only real gripes with NT4 is the start menu
being extremely difficult to modify compared to say Win 95 OSR2 and
later...well, that and getting the service packs installed properly and
with the other correct updates done in between was also a real pain.
*I haven't seen any major discussions of
modern versions of Windows,
other than /maybe/ discussing incompatibilities with certain emulators
or maintenance/disk imaging utilities - which themselves are very much
"on topic". Maybe we need a thread about just how much Windows 8 sucks
compared to Windows 3.x or OS/2 Warp? ;)
I take offense to that. NT 4 is far superior. ;) 
4:37 p.m.
On Sun, 16 Jun 2013, Tothwolf wrote:
*I haven't seen any major discussions of modern
versions of Windows, other
than /maybe/ discussing incompatibilities with certain emulators or
maintenance/disk imaging utilities - which themselves are very much "on
topic". Maybe we need a thread about just how much Windows 8 sucks
compared to Windows 3.x or OS/2 Warp? ;)
"Windows 7 is much more user friendly than Windows Vista. I don't like
that." - Sheldon Cooper
9:04 p.m.
On 6/16/2013 5:37 PM, Fred Cisin wrote:
On Sun, 16 Jun 2013, Tothwolf wrote:
I thought it all started to go down hill when Micro$ wanted to give
Windows the Web Browsers look and feel and only way to run applications.
For computing needs I see 4 main area's of use. 1) Home use. 2) Network
server 3) Educational and government needs 4) Industrial control
and dumb things like washing machines. Did I miss any?
Ben.
*I haven't seen any major discussions of
modern versions of Windows, other
than /maybe/ discussing incompatibilities with certain emulators or
maintenance/disk imaging utilities - which themselves are very much "on
topic". Maybe we need a thread about just how much Windows 8 sucks
compared to Windows 3.x or OS/2 Warp? ;)
"Windows 7 is much more user friendly than Windows Vista. I don't like
that." - Sheldon Cooper
4207
days inactive
4208
days old
6 comments
5 participants
participants (5)
-
b4＠gewt.net -
bfranchuk＠jetnet.ab.ca -
cisin＠xenosoft.com -
dm561＠torfree.net -
tothwolf＠concentric.net