10 Feb
2007
10 Feb
'07
5:19 p.m.
Why is it that there still has been just one patch released from Apple (that
one that fixed the QuickTime exploit) to address just one of the many Month
of Apple Bugs? These bugs need to be fixed and I really hope that Apple is
actively working on patches for all of the exploits related to Mac OS X that
the MOAB team found...is it because they're putting all their programmers
energy into 10.5? If that's true they really should take a few of the
programmers and assign them to making patches for these exploits...what's
the chances of these exploits being fixed in 10.5? c'mon Apple...get on it
already! :-(
10 Feb
10 Feb
6:40 p.m.
On Feb 10, 2007, at 3:19 PM, Hex Star wrote:
Why is it that there still has been just one patch
released from
Apple (that
one that fixed the QuickTime exploit) to address just one of the
many Month
of Apple Bugs?
*looks around*
You got some version of QuickTime that runs on an Apple IIgs or
something? I thought this was "classiccmp."
6:49 p.m.
New subject: Why isn't Apple releasing patches for the Month of Apple Bug exploits???
On Sat, February 10, 2007 23:40, Chris Sullivan wrote:
On Feb 10, 2007, at 3:19 PM, Hex Star wrote:
I'd not feed the troll if I were you ;)
--
adrian/witchy
Binary Dinosaurs creator/curator
www.binarydinosaurs.co.uk - the UKs biggest home computer collection?
Why is it that there still has been just one
patch released from
Apple (that
one that fixed the QuickTime exploit) to address just one of the
many Month
of Apple Bugs?
*looks around*
You got some version of QuickTime that runs on an Apple IIgs or
something? I thought this was "classiccmp."
9:17 p.m.
On 2/10/07, Witchy <witchy at binarydinosaurs.co.uk> wrote:
On Sat, February 10, 2007 23:40, Chris Sullivan wrote:
How exactly is it that others can post OT topics fine but when I do people
jump to the conclusion that I'm a troll? It says in the description of this
list that OT topics are OK...it even says in the email address: "General
Discussion: On-Topic and _Off-Topic_ Posts" <cctalk at classiccmp.org> so what
gives? :-(
On Feb 10, 2007, at 3:19 PM, Hex Star wrote:
I'd not feed the troll if I were you ;)
--
adrian/witchy
Binary Dinosaurs creator/curator
www.binarydinosaurs.co.uk - the UKs biggest home computer collection?
Why is it that there still has been just one
patch released from
Apple (that
one that fixed the QuickTime exploit) to address just one of the
many Month
of Apple Bugs?
*looks around*
You got some version of QuickTime that runs on an Apple IIgs or
something? I thought this was "classiccmp." 
7:34 p.m.
Why is it that there still has been just one patch
released from Apple (that
one that fixed the QuickTime exploit) to address just one of the many Month
of Apple Bugs?
This is terribly OT, but it's far easier for people like LMH to release
exploits than Apple (or, for that matter, Microsoft) to counter, test and
roll out fixes.
--
--------------------------------- personal: http://www.armory.com/~spectre/ ---
Cameron Kaiser * Floodgap Systems * www.floodgap.com * ckaiser at floodgap.com
-- Never explain, never apologise. -- John Arbuthnot "Jackie" Fisher ----------
9:14 p.m.
On 2/10/07, Cameron Kaiser <spectre at floodgap.com> wrote:
erm...well...this list does accept OT posts does it not? I think it says it
does in the description...
Why is it that there still has been just one
patch released from Apple
(that
one that fixed the QuickTime exploit) to address
just one of the many
Month
of Apple Bugs?
This is terribly OT, but it's far easier for people like LMH to release
exploits than Apple (or, for that matter, Microsoft) to counter, test and
roll out fixes.
--
--------------------------------- personal:
http://www.armory.com/~spectre/ ---
Cameron Kaiser * Floodgap Systems * www.floodgap.com *
ckaiser at floodgap.com
-- Never explain, never apologise. -- John Arbuthnot "Jackie" Fisher
----------
9:22 p.m.
New subject: Why isn't Apple releasing patches for the Month of Apple Bug exploits???
If they still haven't released the patches 10 years from now, please
repost it.
9:40 p.m.
On 2/10/07, Fred Cisin <cisin at xenosoft.com> wrote:
If they still haven't released the patches 10 years from now, please
repost it.
am I the only one who sees the urgency in fixing those memory corruption and
root privilege escalation exploits? how could one not see those as very bad
exploits? perhaps people aren't that worried because it is believed apple
will come through with the patches but is just taking their time to ensure
the patches are done with quality? :-(
10:18 p.m.
New subject: Why isn't Apple releasing patches for the Month of Apple Bug exploits???
On Sat, 10 Feb 2007, Hex Star wrote:
am I the only one who sees the urgency in fixing those
memory corruption and
root privilege escalation exploits? how could one not see those as very bad
exploits? perhaps people aren't that worried because it is believed apple
will come through with the patches but is just taking their time to ensure
the patches are done with quality? :-(
Apple takes a while to respond to anything, and there will be
consequences.
15 years ago, incidents of Mac virus problems were more common than PC.
Apple did almost nothing about it, but the situation eventually reversed.
There will be eventually be a resurgence of virus problems on Macs even if
Apple does do the right things.
11 Feb
11 Feb
2:14 p.m.
On 2/10/07, Fred Cisin <cisin at xenosoft.com> wrote:
On Sat, 10 Feb 2007, Hex Star wrote:
how so? Mac OS X is based on linux...so if viruses came back for macs
wouldn't that mean that they also were coming out for linux as well which I
don't think will ever happen due to how it's structured security wise?
am I the only one who sees the urgency in fixing
those memory corruption
and
root privilege escalation exploits? how could one
not see those as very
bad
exploits? perhaps people aren't that worried
because it is believed
apple
will come through with the patches but is just
taking their time to
ensure
the patches are done with quality? :-(
Apple takes a while to respond to anything, and there will be
consequences.
15 years ago, incidents of Mac virus problems were more common than PC.
Apple did almost nothing about it, but the situation eventually reversed.
There will be eventually be a resurgence of virus problems on Macs even if
Apple does do the right things.
2:38 p.m.
On Sunday 11 February 2007 14:14, Hex Star wrote:
how so? Mac OS X is based on linux
Not even close.
Pat
--
Purdue University ITAP/RCAC --- http://www.rcac.purdue.edu/
The Computer Refuge --- http://computer-refuge.org
2:47 p.m.
On 2/11/07, Patrick Finnegan <pat at computer-refuge.org> wrote:
On Sunday 11 February 2007 14:14, Hex Star wrote:
hmm? what do you mean not even close? OK so maybe it's based on Unix, not
linux but it's still a good part of the *nix world is it not? I'm sure it is
seeing as how with all the stuff they've opensourced (all of the *nix
stuff)...it seems to be a good chunk of the OS, the only thing not
opensourced is of course the gui side of OS X...if I'm still wrong please
tell me why as it seems to me that OS X is a great part of *nix...
how so? Mac OS X is based on linux
Not even close.
Pat
--
Purdue University ITAP/RCAC --- http://www.rcac.purdue.edu/
The Computer Refuge --- http://computer-refuge.org
3:54 p.m.
New subject: Why isn't Apple releasing patches for the Month of Apple Bug exploits???
At 11:47 AM -0800 2/11/07, Hex Star wrote:
hmm? what do you mean not even close? OK so maybe
it's based on Unix, not
linux but it's still a good part of the *nix world is it not? I'm sure it is
seeing as how with all the stuff they've opensourced (all of the *nix
stuff)...it seems to be a good chunk of the OS, the only thing not
opensourced is of course the gui side of OS X...if I'm still wrong please
tell me why as it seems to me that OS X is a great part of *nix...
Mac OS X runs on a Mach microkernal, and just happens to have a
optional BSD based subsystem that provides a fairly decent Unix
command-line environment. They also provide an optional, and
crippled X-Windows implementation.
The Unix parts of Mac OS X aren't great, but they are enough for most
of what I need. Personally if I need to do any serious Unix work,
I'll use Solaris, OpenBSD, or even Linux instead.
Don't get me wrong, Mac OS X can make a good Unix workstation, but
Unix or Linux it isn't.
Zane
--
| Zane H. Healy | UNIX Systems Administrator |
| healyzh at aracnet.com (primary) | OpenVMS Enthusiast |
| MONK::HEALYZH (DECnet) | Classic Computer Collector |
+----------------------------------+----------------------------+
| Empire of the Petal Throne and Traveller Role Playing, |
| PDP-10 Emulation and Zane's Computer Museum. |
| http://www.aracnet.com/~healyzh/ |
10 Feb
10 Feb
11:18 p.m.
New subject: Why isn't Apple releasing patches for the Month of Apple Bugexploits???
This is OFF TOPIC, end this thread please.
Jay
11 Feb
11 Feb
2:12 p.m.
New subject: Why isn't Apple releasing patches for the Month of Apple Bugexploits???
On 2/10/07, Jay West <jwest at classiccmp.org> wrote:
This is OFF TOPIC, end this thread please.
Jay
huh? but the list description says it's for on topic and off topic
discussions...you even said that to me...so what's wrong with discussing
this? :-/
Allowed Posts Cctalk subscribers may post both on-topic and off-topic
messages.
2:22 p.m.
New subject: Why isn't Apple releasing patches for the Month of Apple Bugexploits???
On 2/11/07, Hex Star <hexstar at gmail.com> wrote:
On 2/10/07, Jay West <jwest at classiccmp.org> wrote:
in fact...you indeed did say to me that off topic posts are indeed
acceptable on this list when I inquired about having my membership approved
so I'm confused as to why you're now saying the thread should stop because
it's OT when you told me and have put in the list description for this list
(this isn't cctech) that OT posts are OK...(I can provide the original email
with headers as well too for proof that that was really said):
Probably not approved because we tend to get busy and new join requests
aren't always highest up on the list of fires we have to fight :)
Ok... I will approve your list membership immediately - as soon as you tell
me which list you want to be on. cctalk and cctech are the SAME list. You
don't want to join both or you will get duplicate posts. The only difference
is that any posts we feel are off topic are stripped from cctech before they
go out. So with cctech you get nothing but strictly on-topic posts. On
cctalk you get all those posts too, but you also get a bit of non-computer
or off-topic banter posts amonst the listmembers.
Please pick one and email me directly at jwest at classiccmp.org and I'll fix
you up.
Jay
- Hide quoted text -
----- Original Message -----
*From:* Hex Star <hexstar at gmail.com>
*To:* jwest at classiccmp.org ; cctech-owner at classiccmp.org
*Sent:* Tuesday, February 06, 2007 12:26 AM
*Subject:* Why is my membership not being approved? :-(
Hi, I've applied for membership to both the cctalk and cctech mailing lists
a while ago and again tonight because I never got any confirmation as to
whether or not my application for membership to those lists ever got
approved or not...I'm assuming not as I don't believe I've gotten any emails
This is OFF TOPIC, end this thread please.
Jay
huh? but the list description says it's for on topic and off topic
discussions...you even said that to me...so what's wrong with discussing
this? :-/
Allowed Posts Cctalk subscribers may post both on-topic and off-topic
messages.
from either list...can you please tell me why my
memberships are not being
approved? Perhaps you just forgot and would please be so
kind as to approve
my memberships for both lists? Thanks! :-)
P.S. Sorry if you get this email twice, not sure which email address is the
best one to reach you at..oh and the email address which I'm signing up with
is the same one as I'm sending this email from ( hexstar at gmail.com)
4:47 p.m.
New subject: Why isn't Apple releasing patches for the Month of AppleBugexploits???
Hex wrote....
in fact...you indeed did say to me that off topic
posts are indeed
acceptable ....snip....
You're right, I did. Let me explain further below. This
isn't your fault,
it's mine.
I had written privately....
Probably not approved because...snip...
It's
bad form to quote private email in public. That, is not my fault ;)
Hex - most of us (including me) have been here for many years and have
fallen into an automatic gut reaction that most of us agree on as to what is
on topic and what is not - and how far something off-topic can be taken.
Many people who join this list hang around for a bit and watch before
posting much - perhaps to get a flavor for the bounds of conversation (it's
hard to put in black and white actually).
In any case, it's my job to nudge conversations back on-topic when they have
either gone on too long or gotten too far off the beaten path of interest
here. Don't take it personal (and I hope no one else does) when I ask to end
a thread or move things back more on-topic. After a while you'll develop
that same sense of when things are going too far off-topic. To sum up - I
should have clarified with you from the beginning and anyone would have
taken what I said the way you did - but it would be more precise to say that
while this view of the list allows both on-topic and off-topic discussion,
there is bounds on the off-topic discussion. It's not 'anything goes', and
if people get too far off I'll nudge them back on :)
Jay
5:02 p.m.
New subject: Why isn't Apple releasing patches for the Month of AppleBugexploits???
On 2/11/07, Jay West <jwest at classiccmp.org> wrote:
Hex wrote....
ok sounds good...thanks a lot for the clarification Jay and Jim :-)
in fact...you indeed did say to me that off topic
posts are indeed
acceptable ....snip....
You're right, I did. Let me explain further below.
This isn't your fault,
it's mine.
I had written privately....
Probably not approved because...snip...
It's bad form to quote private email in public. That, is not my fault ;)
Hex - most of us (including me) have been here for many years and have
fallen into an automatic gut reaction that most of us agree on as to what
is
on topic and what is not - and how far something off-topic can be taken.
Many people who join this list hang around for a bit and watch before
posting much - perhaps to get a flavor for the bounds of conversation
(it's
hard to put in black and white actually).
In any case, it's my job to nudge conversations back on-topic when they
have
either gone on too long or gotten too far off the beaten path of interest
here. Don't take it personal (and I hope no one else does) when I ask to
end
a thread or move things back more on-topic. After a while you'll develop
that same sense of when things are going too far off-topic. To sum up - I
should have clarified with you from the beginning and anyone would have
taken what I said the way you did - but it would be more precise to say
that
while this view of the list allows both on-topic and off-topic discussion,
there is bounds on the off-topic discussion. It's not 'anything goes', and
if people get too far off I'll nudge them back on :)
Jay
2:43 p.m.
New subject: Why isn't Apple releasing patches for the Month of Apple Bugexploits???
On Sunday 11 February 2007 14:12, Hex Star wrote:
On 2/10/07, Jay West <jwest at classiccmp.org>
wrote:
Would you post "why hasn't Apple released Macos patches" on a Windows
mailing list that says it allows off-topic posts?
Pat
--
Purdue University ITAP/RCAC --- http://www.rcac.purdue.edu/
The Computer Refuge --- http://computer-refuge.org
This is OFF TOPIC, end this thread please.
Jay
huh? but the list description says it's for on topic and off topic
discussions...you even said that to me...so what's wrong with
discussing this? :-/
2:49 p.m.
New subject: Why isn't Apple releasing patches for the Month of Apple Bugexploits???
On 2/11/07, Patrick Finnegan <pat at computer-refuge.org> wrote:
On Sunday 11 February 2007 14:12, Hex Star wrote:
maybe...if there were some people on there that expressed they had great
experience in macs and simply worked with windows because their business
required it (as often is the unfortunate case ;-) )...and since there are
people here on this list with a great deal of experience with macs I thought
that this list would be a good place to discuss this as they no doubt have
some great experience with this side of Apple
On 2/10/07, Jay West <jwest at
classiccmp.org> wrote:
Would you post "why hasn't Apple released Macos patches" on a Windows
mailing list that says it allows off-topic posts?
Pat
--
Purdue University ITAP/RCAC --- http://www.rcac.purdue.edu/
The Computer Refuge --- http://computer-refuge.org
This is OFF TOPIC, end this thread please.
Jay
huh? but the list description says it's for on topic and off topic
discussions...you even said that to me...so what's wrong with
discussing this? :-/ 
3:34 p.m.
New subject: Why isn't Apple releasing patches for the Month of Apple Bugexploits???
On 11 Feb 2007 at 11:49, Hex Star wrote:
maybe...if there were some people on there that
expressed they had great
experience in macs and simply worked with windows because their business
required it (as often is the unfortunate case ;-) )...and since there are
people here on this list with a great deal of experience with macs I thought
that this list would be a good place to discuss this as they no doubt have
some great experience with this side of Apple
Off-topic or on, the problem that I see with the original post is
that it's complaining about something that the list members don't
have any control over (unless there's someone in Apple management who
hasn't yet rasied his hand). i.e., there's no information to be had,
nor any course of action that can be taken. The best we can do is
commiserate with you.
As far as QT on a PC goes, I'll install it when I really need it,
then unstall it--it plays hob with file associations (no matter what
I tell the setup program) on my system.
My 20 mills, anyway.
Cheers,
Chuck
3:46 p.m.
New subject: Why isn't Apple releasing patches for the Month of Apple Bugexploits???
On 2/11/07, Chuck Guzis <cclist at sydex.com> wrote:
On 11 Feb 2007 at 11:49, Hex Star wrote:
well the point was to have people say based on their experience with Apple
whether or not it's likely the exploits will be patched and if so soon or
not for a while or never, etc and for people to express their concerns as to
how important the patching of these exploits may or may not be to them so
that if Apple ever does stumble upon this thread they'd hopefully see that
there's just one more group of people who feel it's important to have these
bad exploits patched up in a timely and professional manner :-)
maybe...if there were some people on there that
expressed they had great
experience in macs and simply worked with windows because their business
required it (as often is the unfortunate case ;-) )...and since there
are
people here on this list with a great deal of
experience with macs I
thought
that this list would be a good place to discuss
this as they no doubt
have
some great experience with this side of Apple
Off-topic or on, the problem that I see with the original post is
that it's complaining about something that the list members don't
have any control over (unless there's someone in Apple management who
hasn't yet rasied his hand). i.e., there's no information to be had,
nor any course of action that can be taken. The best we can do is
commiserate with you.
As far as QT on a PC goes, I'll install it when I really need it,
then unstall it--it plays hob with file associations (no matter what
I tell the setup program) on my system.
My 20 mills, anyway.
Cheers,
Chuck
3:47 p.m.
New subject: Why isn't Apple releasing patches for the Month of Apple Bugexploits???
On 2/11/07, Hex Star <hexstar at gmail.com> wrote:
On 2/11/07, Chuck Guzis <cclist at sydex.com> wrote:
of course I don't expect immediate changes in Apple or some definitive data
on this from this list...who would? I just thought as said in the above
post...
On 11 Feb 2007 at 11:49, Hex Star wrote:
well the point was to have people say based on their experience with Apple
whether or not it's likely the exploits will be patched and if so soon or
not for a while or never, etc and for people to express their concerns as to
how important the patching of these exploits may or may not be to them so
that if Apple ever does stumble upon this thread they'd hopefully see that
there's just one more group of people who feel it's important to have these
bad exploits patched up in a timely and professional manner :-)
maybe...if there were some people on there that
expressed they had
great
experience in macs and simply worked with windows
because their
business
required it (as often is the unfortunate case ;-)
)...and since there
are
people here on this list with a great deal of
experience with macs I
thought
that this list would be a good place to discuss
this as they no doubt
have
some great experience with this side of Apple
Off-topic or on, the problem that I see with the original post is
that it's complaining about something that the list members don't
have any control over (unless there's someone in Apple management who
hasn't yet rasied his hand). i.e., there's no information to be had,
nor any course of action that can be taken. The best we can do is
commiserate with you.
As far as QT on a PC goes, I'll install it when I really need it,
then unstall it--it plays hob with file associations (no matter what
I tell the setup program) on my system.
My 20 mills, anyway.
Cheers,
Chuck
4 p.m.
New subject: Why isn't Apple releasing patches for the Month of Apple Bugexploits???
Not to carry the thread too much further, but:
1. Jay is the moderator, and he noted this is off-topic. Asking the
list members for clarification is the wrong direction to pursue.
Ask Jay via a private message.
2. I believe the context of "off-topic" in here is akin to:
1. Machine that is not new, but not yet considered "classic".
Later 68K Macs or maybe early PPC Macs would qualify
2. Something that is way old, but not exactly a computer (an
old truck that hauled PDPs around might make the cut)
3. Something that is new, but has classic computer ties
(C64DTV, FPGA implementations of a VAX, etc.) or can help
older machines (FPGAs, SerialATA chipsets for grafting new
drives into old machines)
3. Things that get a lot of coverage elsewhere are pruned rather
viciously in here. There's tons of sites talking about Mac and
WIndows exploits, so there's no need to waste bandwidth here
discussing them. Now, if someone talked about exploits for the
AmigaOne, which has little coverage elsewhere, the group here
might be OK for a bit, since the discussion involves #2.3 above.
But, #2 and #3 are my opinion. Ask Jay via PM if you want to continue
the discussion. The moderator has spoken, and it is his list.
Jim
4:41 p.m.
New subject: Why isn't Apple releasing patches for the Month of Apple Bugexploits???
On 2/11/07, Jim Brain <brain at jbrain.com> wrote:
Not to carry the thread too much further, but:
1. Jay is the moderator, and he noted this is off-topic. Asking the
list members for clarification is the wrong direction to pursue.
Ask Jay via a private message.
2. I believe the context of "off-topic" in here is akin to:
1. Machine that is not new, but not yet considered "classic".
Later 68K Macs or maybe early PPC Macs would qualify
2. Something that is way old, but not exactly a computer (an
old truck that hauled PDPs around might make the cut)
3. Something that is new, but has classic computer ties
(C64DTV, FPGA implementations of a VAX, etc.) or can help
older machines (FPGAs, SerialATA chipsets for grafting new
drives into old machines)
3. Things that get a lot of coverage elsewhere are pruned rather
viciously in here. There's tons of sites talking about Mac and
WIndows exploits, so there's no need to waste bandwidth here
discussing them. Now, if someone talked about exploits for the
AmigaOne, which has little coverage elsewhere, the group here
might be OK for a bit, since the discussion involves #2.3 above.
But, #2 and #3 are my opinion. Ask Jay via PM if you want to continue
the discussion. The moderator has spoken, and it is his list.
Jim
oh ok...that makes sense...sorry for this mess...see the confusion stemmed
from Jay and the list description both saying off topic
discussions are OK
but it didn't go into much detail as to what was considered
OT and
acceptable for the list thus IMO leaving that up to the posters discretion
which thus led to this as I interpreted that rule differently then the
people who have been here for a long time...maybe it'd be a good idea to
clarify the OT part of the list rules a bit more so as to avoid any further
possible confusion on the part of newcomers like me (maybe one of the Q's
for the 2.0 FAQ?)...thanks for the great clarification Jim though and the
confirmation of it being around or = to Jay's idea of the rule...now I
understand and apologize for this :-)
5:39 p.m.
New subject: Why isn't Apple releasing patches for the Month of Apple Bugexploits???
At 11:34 AM 2/11/2007, you wrote:
On 11 Feb 2007 at 11:49, Hex Star wrote:
It would have helped if you had linked to something interesting and
completely insane.
For example,
http://mactalk.com.au/articles/68kpanther/
Some people might not consider a computer from 1994 vintage, however since
Linux DOES run on the 386...
Someone with a VAX 11/780 should be able to run OS X too. Maybe running
Windows Vista on it would make more of an impact. Seriously, anyone like
projects like this just because they push the extreme?
; )
Grant
maybe...if there were some people on there that
expressed they had great
experience in macs and simply worked with windows because their business
required it (as often is the unfortunate case ;-) )...and since there are
people here on this list with a great deal of experience with macs I
thought
> that this list would be a good place to discuss this as they no doubt have
> some great experience with this side of Apple
7:28 p.m.
New subject: Why isn't Apple releasing patches for the Month of Apple Bugexploits???
On 2/11/07, Grant Stockly <grant at stockly.com> wrote:
At 11:34 AM 2/11/2007, you wrote:
have
ah I see...and if the 780=a 780mhz processor...just overclock it 20mhz and
you've met the bare minimum for vista (but you also have the ram and video
card as well...) :P :-)
On 11 Feb 2007 at 11:49, Hex Star wrote:
> maybe...if there were some people on there that expressed they had
great
> experience in macs and simply worked with
windows because their
business
> required it (as often is the unfortunate
case ;-) )...and since there
are
people
here on this list with a great deal of experience with macs I
thought
> that this list would be a good place to discuss this as they no doubt > some great experience with this side of
Apple
It would have helped if you had linked to something interesting and
completely insane.
For example,
http://mactalk.com.au/articles/68kpanther/
Some people might not consider a computer from 1994 vintage, however since
Linux DOES run on the 386...
Someone with a VAX 11/780 should be able to run OS X too. Maybe running
Windows Vista on it would make more of an impact. Seriously, anyone like
projects like this just because they push the extreme?
; )
Grant
12 Feb
12 Feb
2:15 a.m.
New subject: Why isn't Apple releasing patches for the Month of Apple Bugexploits???
Hex Star wrote:
ah I see...and if the 780=a 780mhz processor...just
overclock it 20mhz and
you've met the bare minimum for vista (but you also have the ram and video
card as well...) :P :-)
Could you at least Google the machine before you write about it?
Peace... Sridhar
7 a.m.
New subject: Why isn't Apple releasing patches for the Month of Apple Bugexploits???
On 12/02/2007, at 11:28 AM, Hex Star wrote:
ah I
see...and if the 780=a 780mhz processor...just overclock it
20mhz and
you've met the bare minimum for vista (but you also have the ram
and video
card as well...) :P :-)
The "bad" news is that a VAX-11/780 has a 500KHz clock (I had to
check I didn't write 500MHz there :-)
Huw Davies | e-mail: Huw.Davies at kerberos.davies.net.au
Melbourne | "If soccer was meant to be played in the
Australia | air, the sky would be painted green"
8:09 a.m.
New subject: Why isn't Apple releasing patches for the Month of Apple Bugexploits???
On Mon, Feb 12, 2007 at 11:00:34PM +1100, Huw Davies wrote:
On 12/02/2007, at 11:28 AM, Hex Star wrote:
ah
I see...and if the 780=a 780mhz processor...just overclock it
The "bad" news is that a VAX-11/780 has a 500KHz clock (I had to
check I didn't write 500MHz there :-)
Err... are you sure you don't mean 5 MHz? I know it was 1977 and they
chiseled ICs directly out of raw basalt back then, but even still! :)
http://www.netbsd.org/Documentation/Hardware/Machines/DEC/vax/vax700.html#v…
The early VAXes took quite a few clock cycles to execute each instruction,
and the 11/780 could execute about 500,000 instructions/sec. Perhaps this
is where you're getting your figure from?
Cheers,
Brian.
15 Feb
15 Feb
7:28 a.m.
New subject: Why isn't Apple releasing patches for the Month of Apple Bugexploits???
On 13/02/2007, at 12:09 AM, Brian Foley wrote:
On Mon, Feb 12, 2007 at 11:00:34PM +1100, Huw Davies
wrote:
More than happy to stand corrected - yes, I recalled the 500K
instructions/second and mapped that to a 500KHz clock.
Huw Davies | e-mail: Huw.Davies at kerberos.davies.net.au
Melbourne | "If soccer was meant to be played in the
Australia | air, the sky would be painted green"
The "bad" news is that a VAX-11/780 has a 500KHz clock (I had to
check I didn't write 500MHz there :-)
Err... are you sure you don't mean 5 MHz? I know it was 1977 and they
chiseled ICs directly out of raw basalt back then, but even still! :)
http://www.netbsd.org/Documentation/Hardware/Machines/DEC/vax/
vax700.html#vax700:vax_11_780
The early VAXes took quite a few clock cycles to execute each
instruction,
and the 11/780 could execute about 500,000 instructions/sec.
Perhaps this
is where you're getting your figure from?
12 Feb
12 Feb
11:36 a.m.
New subject: Why isn't Apple releasing patches for the Month of Apple Bugexploits???
On Monday 12 February 2007 07:00, Huw Davies wrote:
On 12/02/2007, at 11:28 AM, Hex Star wrote:
Actually, from reading the service manual, I seem to remember it being
10MHz.
Pat
--
Purdue University ITAP/RCAC --- http://www.rcac.purdue.edu/
The Computer Refuge --- http://computer-refuge.org
ah I see...and if the 780=a 780mhz
processor...just overclock it
20mhz and
you've met the bare minimum for vista (but you also have the ram
and video
card as well...) :P :-)
The "bad" news is that a VAX-11/780 has a 500KHz clock (I had to
check I didn't write 500MHz there :-)
11:46 a.m.
New subject: Why isn't Apple releasing patches for the Month of Apple Bugexploits???
Patrick Finnegan wrote:
On Monday 12 February 2007 07:00, Huw Davies wrote:
5MHz. It has a 200ns clock.
Peace... Sridhar
On 12/02/2007, at 11:28 AM, Hex Star wrote:
Actually, from reading the service manual, I seem to remember it being
10MHz. ah I see...and if the 780=a 780mhz
processor...just overclock it
20mhz and
you've met the bare minimum for vista (but you also have the ram
and video
card as well...) :P :-)
The "bad" news is that a VAX-11/780 has a 500KHz
clock (I had to
check I didn't write 500MHz there :-) 
6:41 p.m.
New subject: Why isn't Apple releasing patches for the Month of Apple
The "bad" news is that a VAX-11/780 has a
500KHz clock (I had to
check I didn't write 500MHz there :-)
Are you dure? While I can well believe it averages 500,000 VAX
insturctions per second, the machine was very heavily microcoded, and I
refuse to believe the microcycle clock is anything like as slow as that.
-tony
13 Feb
13 Feb
11:56 a.m.
New subject: Why isn't Apple releasing patches for the Month of Apple
Tony Duell wrote:
I thought it was always considered a 1 MIPS machine.
During its time, it was the base for most of the benchmark
programs. (MIPS, MUPS, and all that)
The
"bad" news is that a VAX-11/780 has a 500KHz clock (I had to
check I didn't write 500MHz there :-)
Are you dure? While I can well believe it averages 500,000 VAX
insturctions per second, the machine was very heavily microcoded, and I
refuse to believe the microcycle clock is anything like as slow as that.
2:19 p.m.
New subject: Why isn't Apple releasing patches for the Month of Apple
Tony Duell wrote:
I thought it was always considered a 1 MIPS machine.
During its time, it was the base for most of the benchmark
programs. (MIPS, MUPS, and all that)
It was. Well, but definition it's one VUP.
However, 'What is an instruction?'. I've heard it said that the 11/780
averaged 500,000 of its machine instructions per second, but that that
was about as much processing as 10^6 of other machine's instructions :-)
-tony
The
"bad" news is that a VAX-11/780 has a 500KHz clock (I had to
check I didn't write 500MHz there :-)
Are you dure? While I can well believe it averages 500,000 VAX
insturctions per second, the machine was very heavily microcoded, and I
refuse to believe the microcycle clock is anything like as slow as that.
5:11 p.m.
New subject: Why isn't Apple releasing patches for the Month of Apple
Tony Duell wrote:
However, 'What is an instruction?'. I've
heard it said that the 11/780
averaged 500,000 of its machine instructions per second, but that that
was about as much processing as 10^6 of other machine's instructions
The VAX-11/780 cranked out about as many Dhrystones as an
IBM System/370 158 which did (apparently) chew through about
one million instructions per second.
Quite how the VAX-11/780 became the reference 1 MIP machine
while technically cranking through only half that many instructions
is something that I've never figured out. Anyone know?
Oddly enough, even IBM accepts this history:
http://www-306.ibm.com/chips/techlib/techlib.nsf/techdocs/BFDAA658D08935
5987256B3E0075E163/$file/Benchmarking.pdf
Antonio
5:57 p.m.
New subject: Why isn't Apple releasing patches for the Month of Apple
On 13 Feb 2007 at 22:11, arcarlini at iee.org wrote:
Quite how the VAX-11/780 became the reference 1 MIP
machine
while technically cranking through only half that many instructions
is something that I've never figured out. Anyone know?
Does a MIP have any practical meaning other than comparing two
machines of the same architecture?
I worked on a machine during the 70's that probably had an issue rate
comparable to the 11/780 but could crank out nearly 100 MFlops.
It reminds me of comparing clock speeds as a measure of dissimilar
processor performance. Wasn't there someone on the 6809 project who
said something to the effect that if clock speed really meant
something, they could have fit the 6809 with a waveguide?
Cheers,
Chuck
6:03 p.m.
New subject: Why isn't Apple releasing patches for the Month of Apple
On 13/2/07 22:11, "arcarlini at iee.org" <arcarlini at iee.org> wrote:
Quite how the VAX-11/780 became the reference 1 MIP
machine
while technically cranking through only half that many instructions
is something that I've never figured out. Anyone know?
Oddly enough, even IBM accepts this history:
Given the old machines I've been exposed to recently I can only say it's
because they smelt nice when hot :)
--
Adrian/Witchy
Binary Dinosaurs creator/curator
Www.binarydinosaurs.co.uk - the UK's biggest private home computer
collection?
6372
days inactive
6377
days old
39 comments
17 participants
participants (17)
-
arcarlini＠iee.org -
ard＠p850ug1.demon.co.uk -
bfoley＠dcs.warwick.ac.uk -
brain＠jbrain.com -
cclist＠sydex.com -
cisin＠xenosoft.com -
feedle＠feedle.net -
grant＠stockly.com -
healyzh＠aracnet.com -
hexstar＠gmail.com -
huw.davies＠kerberos.davies.net.au -
jwest＠classiccmp.org -
kth＠srv.net -
pat＠computer-refuge.org -
ploopster＠gmail.com -
spectre＠floodgap.com -
witchy＠binarydinosaurs.co.uk