24 Jan
2010
24 Jan
'10
10:15 a.m.
Rob Jarrat wrote:
If there were no interest in things that pre-dated our
own lifetimes then
there would not be any museums.
Of course, but that wasn't my point. My point
is that I observe there
to be, in general, LESS interest in collecting items that predate our
own existence. For example, I know many more people who own classic
cars like Mustangs simply because they always wanted one while growing
up, or maybe had one... than those collectors who own Ford Model Ts.
You could make the argument that Mustangs are more readily available,
but that wouldn't be true. It's just that few if any those Mustang
owners have any interest in Model T's for any number of valid
reasons. So, I'm drawing a distinction between personal nostalgia and
emotional response, vs. collecting purely for historical enjoyment or
purposes.
Rob Jarrat wrote:
The peculiar problem faced by computer
history is perhaps the frenetic pace of computer development, which has
meant that historically interesting computers are not generally recognised
as such because they are still relatively recent and become obsolete so
quickly that they are discarded far too readily.
Excellent point. Which leads to
wonder if only the early computers --
when development moved slower and there were far fewer models in
existence -- will remain the collectible ones. I don't see any
computers in most of the 90's, and none at all from 2000 onwards that
I'd ever want to collect. Wonder how others feel? Will a Dell PC
ever be collectible? Are Apples the only ones that might stand a
chance? Are all computers now merely appliances with zero personality?
John Singleton
24 Jan
24 Jan
12:12 p.m.
On Sunday 24 January 2010, js at cimmeri.com wrote:
Excellent point. Which leads to wonder if only the
early computers
-- when development moved slower and there were far fewer models in
existence -- will remain the collectible ones. I don't see any
computers in most of the 90's, and none at all from 2000 onwards
that I'd ever want to collect. Wonder how others feel? Will a
Dell PC ever be collectible? Are Apples the only ones that might
stand a chance? Are all computers now merely appliances with zero
personality?
It depends. "Home computers" are generally appliances, but there are
still interesting computers being produced, IMO. Stuff like Sun Niagra
(UltraSparc T1/T2) series machines, IBM mainframes, SiCortex's machines,
Crays, and other high-dollar/high end machines. Even things like the XO
OLPC, Asus Eee PC, Apple original iPhone and iPod, etc, are unique
enough (or were when they came out) that I'd say they are collectible.
(that's not to say that I find them interesting, but I can understand
someone finding them to be interesting).
I don't think $random_home_pc is much less collectible than
$random_s100_bus_machine really is. I've got S-100 bus machines (mostly
gone now to other collectors) that people generally were more interested
in the cards in them, than the system itself. In that regard, old PCs
are similar to old "generic" S-100 bus machines... the parts are easily
worth more than the assembled machine.
Pat
--
Purdue University Research Computing --- http://www.rcac.purdue.edu/
The Computer Refuge --- http://computer-refuge.org
6:57 p.m.
It depends. "Home computers" are generally
appliances, but there are
still interesting computers being produced, IMO. Stuff like Sun Niagra
(UltraSparc T1/T2) series machines, IBM mainframes, SiCortex's machines,
Crays, and other high-dollar/high end machines. Even things like the XO
OLPC, Asus Eee PC, Apple original iPhone and iPod, etc, are unique
enough (or were when they came out) that I'd say they are collectible.
(that's not to say that I find them interesting, but I can understand
someone finding them to be interesting).
I was reading an interview with Richard Stallman, and while I have some
opinions about Mr Stallman not germane to this mailing list, I have to admit
the man has an intriguing computer: a Lemote Yeelong, based on the Chinese
Godson/Loongson MIPS chips.
http://richard.stallman.usesthis.com/
I know China is putting big renminbi into MIPS so they don't have to deal
with the licensing headaches of x86, but it's cool to see such a device,
and I have to admit that Mr Stallman practises what he preaches. I'm even
tempted to get one just to see what those systems are like.
--
------------------------------------ personal: http://www.cameronkaiser.com/ --
Cameron Kaiser * Floodgap Systems * www.floodgap.com * ckaiser at floodgap.com
-- Do me a favour: don't breed. -- "Sledge Hammer!"
---------------------------
7:20 p.m.
On 24 Jan 2010 at 18:57, Cameron Kaiser wrote:
I know China is putting big renminbi into MIPS so they
don't have to
deal with the licensing headaches of x86, but it's cool to see such a
device, and I have to admit that Mr Stallman practises what he
preaches. I'm even tempted to get one just to see what those systems
are like.
If you like that sort of thing and want to get collectable, try
looking for a NEC Bungo Mini. Mid 80's, runs CP/M with full Kanji.
Very small--not much bigger than a Netbook.
--Chuck
7:35 p.m.
I know China
is putting big renminbi into MIPS so they don't have to
deal with the licensing headaches of x86, but it's cool to see such a
device, and I have to admit that Mr Stallman practises what he
preaches. I'm even tempted to get one just to see what those systems
are like.
If you like that sort of thing and want to get collectable, try
looking for a NEC Bungo Mini. Mid 80's, runs CP/M with full Kanji.
Very small--not much bigger than a Netbook. 
12:48 p.m.
----- Original Message -----
From: <js at cimmeri.com>
To: <cctalk at classiccmp.org>
Sent: Sunday, January 24, 2010 1:15 PM
Subject: Re: Museums
Excellent point. Which leads to wonder if only the
early computers --
when development moved slower and there were far fewer models in
existence -- will remain the collectible ones. I don't see any
computers in most of the 90's, and none at all from 2000 onwards that I'd
ever want to collect. Wonder how others feel? Will a Dell PC ever be
collectible? Are Apples the only ones that might stand a chance? Are
all computers now merely appliances with zero personality?
John Singleton
I think the 90's will be collectable because of the history and variety of
3D Video (and somewhat sound) revolution in gaming. There are quite a few
companies (many no longer around) that were involved in that era, and people
will want vintage machines to run those cards in.
Check out this link for example:
http://www.maximumpc.com/print/6338
The fact that recycling started getting serious in that time frame I bet
that the supply of those machines (and each generation after) will be quite
small by the time people show interest.
It seems people are hunting down 386/486 machines now, and they are getting
harder to find even if they were made in the millions. I see P2/P3 machines
recycled in the 100's each month where I live. Recently Goodwill got a deal
with DELL to recycle old computers for free (including monitors), so that
will just speed up the process of recycling since people do not even have to
pay a token amount anymore. I suspect in a decade CRT monitors will be hard
to find in working condition.
2:59 p.m.
Of course, but that wasn't my point. ?My point is
that I observe there to
be, in general, LESS interest in collecting items that predate our own
existence. ? For example, ?I know many more people who own classic cars like
Mustangs simply because they always wanted one while growing up, or maybe
had one... than those collectors who own Ford Model Ts.
Everything collectible has a generational aspect. With your example,
the generation that connected with Model Ts is gone, and interest has
diminished. It has not, however, died, and will likely never die. Our
computers are the same way - 50 years from now, the plethora of 1980
era micros with be in the same boat. Many will be likely junked as
interest will have waned, but later, interest will level off, and the
survivors will be cherished.
?Wonder how others feel? ? ?Will a Dell PC ever be
collectible? ? Are Apples
the only ones that might stand a chance? ? ?Are all computers now merely
appliances with zero personality?
Everything that man has ever made has become collectible. Computers
will not break that long term rule, no matter how we today hate a Dell
running Windows.
--
Will
3:44 p.m.
> ?Wonder how others feel? ? ?Will a Dell PC ever be
collectible? ?
> Are Apples the only ones that might stand a chance? ? ?Are all
> computers now merely appliances with zero personality?
On Erik's VC Forum, there have been two notable requests. One was
for a P1 PCChips motherboard, probably close to the bottom of the
barrel in terms of quality. The other was for a Packard-Bell 486
desktop.
Both were from people who had used them as their first computer.
Are Yugos collectable yet?
--Chuck
6:51 p.m.
Are Yugos
collectable yet?
US market Yugos are quite collectible. 
7:20 p.m.
On Sun, 24 Jan 2010, Chuck Guzis wrote:
Are Yugos collectable yet?
Well, it's funny you ask; I happen to think so. So I acquired six of
them, two of which were for parts for the other (decent) four. Some types
of Yugo are indeed quite collectible; the major type that I don't have is
the Cabrio convertible, which still goes for a decent sum.
Yes, I realize you asked your question in jest.
Richard Schauer
'81 DeLorean DMC-12
'80 CVI Comutacar electric
'88 Yugo GV x 2
'88 Yugo GVX
'90 Yugo GV+
'75 Suzuki RE-5 motorcycle
... and a lot of classic computers packed in around the cars :-)
7:36 p.m.
Richard Schauer
'81 DeLorean DMC-12
'80 CVI Comutacar electric
'88 Yugo GV x 2
'88 Yugo GVX
'90 Yugo GV+
'75 Suzuki RE-5 motorcycle
... and a lot of classic computers packed in around the cars :-)
Dang. What, um, is your, uh, street address?
--
------------------------------------ personal: http://www.cameronkaiser.com/ --
Cameron Kaiser * Floodgap Systems * www.floodgap.com * ckaiser at floodgap.com
-- "I'd love to go out with you, but I'm watching the cat litter clump."
------
25 Jan
25 Jan
6:47 a.m.
On Sun, 24 Jan 2010, Cameron Kaiser wrote:
Yeah right! I'm in the northwest suburbs of Chicago. There's actually
quite strong owner's communities for all four of the above types of
"unusual" vehicle, DeLorean and Citicar/Comutacar being the most cohesive.
Richard
Richard
Schauer
'81 DeLorean DMC-12
'80 CVI Comutacar electric
'88 Yugo GV x 2
'88 Yugo GVX
'90 Yugo GV+
'75 Suzuki RE-5 motorcycle
... and a lot of classic computers packed in around the cars :-)
Dang. What, um, is your, uh, street address?
24 Jan
24 Jan
7:39 p.m.
On 24 Jan 2010 at 21:20, Richard Schauer wrote:
Yes, I realize you asked your question in jest.
Yes, I suppose that goes toward the "you can collect anything". I
suspect that someone has a collection of Studebaker Scotsman models.
Perception changes with time. I can remember seeing my first Ford
Mustang and thinking how stupid it looked.
Similarly, I suspect that some of the uber-ugly cars on today's roads
will be collector's items.
--Chuck
9:47 p.m.
On 24 Jan 2010 at 22:44, William Donzelli wrote:
So when do you think the price of a Trabant will pass $50K?
--Chuck
Yes, I suppose
that goes toward the "you can collect anything". ?I
suspect that someone has a collection of Studebaker Scotsman models.
...and yes, there is a registry. 
7:51 p.m.
js at cimmeri.com wrote:
I don't see any
computers in most of the 90's, and none at all from 2000 onwards that
I'd ever want to collect. Wonder how others feel? Will a Dell PC
ever be collectible? Are Apples the only ones that might stand a
chance? Are all computers now merely appliances with zero personality?
Good questions, John.
My computer of choice is the Amiga. While I'm still trying to get to
the bottom of my fascination with the Amiga, one of the reasons is
because I grew up with the machine. Many summers between high school
years I spent programming, and learning, and hacking, and so on. But
also because of the community that was built around this special
machine. During the late 80's and early 90's, the IBMs and clones had
already taken a pretty good foothold, and so the majority of the
software/hardware support for was PCs. This divide created a stronger
minority, and the need to stick together produced pretty strong devotees.
If you look at places like amiga.org, english amiga board, amigaworld,
etc --- this devotion dies hard!
The amiga was special in terms of design and held several technical
advantages over designs at the time(and some might argue, as I've seen
recently, some aspects of today's designs)
We were different, and we were better. And we had personality.
I spent large sums of money (credit, actually) upgrading my A500 to add
hard drive, faster processor, more memory, etc. This held me off until
Feb 1998 where I just couldn't deny the technology advances that PC's
had made. And the desire to finally have access to all of the software
available for Windows. Amiga freeware/shareware was good, and fairly
robust, but just couldn't touch the PC base.
So I also like playing with my old amiga because older technology is
more accessible to the hobbyist. It is often easier to understand.
Affordable tools can deal with the single-digit megahertz clocks in
comparison to single-digit gigahertz. Cheap logic analyzers,
oscilloscopes, etc can be used. And it's more discrete. Less
condensed. Getting to the heart is easier.
And plus, it's unique. Not everyone has/had one, but they were popular
enough. I can't tell you how many people I run into that say, "Oh,
Amigas. Yeah, I had a 500. I loved that machine." I hear that all the
time.
So I recently decommissioned the PII 333mhz Dell I bought in 1998. It
was powered on for about 11 years in a row -- had uptimes of 1.5years in
some cases. Zero hardware failure. It was worth the $3k I paid for it
in 1998.
But do I care about it? No. It seems hardly different from the P4 that
replaced it. Or the quad core that replaced that. Have there been
technological advances? Definitely. But there's just no soul.
Sometimes I ran Windows, sometimes Linux. So it's not really the OS.
It's something that is hard to put my finger on.
I've heard and seen the Mac crowd. And many amigans went the way of the
Mac. And I've seen some people talk about their Macs in sort of the
same way I talk(ed) about the amiga. But there's just something about
Apple that I just can't stand. I'm not sure if it's the elitist
attitude, or the prices, or the forced-lock-ins.
I see my current machines as tools. As soon as they lose enough life, I
get rid of them, and buy a new one. I simply don't have the same
connection with the computer. It just doesn't feel alive.
I've seen often that fascination comes with ignorance. You know, sort
of the "Anything so technologically advanced is indistinguishable from
magic"-concept. And so as I learn more about this stuff, the
magic-factor dissipates and unfortunately, I'm left with completely
understandable and rationally explainable concepts. And so it ruins the
magic somewhat.
This has NOT happened w/ the Amiga because I'm left with the feeling of,
"oh, these guys were smart." They couldn't do xyz with raw cpu power,
but instead used the graphics chip to encode/decode MFM. Or whatever.
There's a feeling of ingenuity and cleverness that is either
a> not there today
b> hidden between so many layers of abstraction that it's nearly
impossible to put your finger on it.
If I could have lunch with someone famous, I'd pick the designer of the
Amiga, or the Atari ST, or the TRS-80, or maybe some early apples even.
How about someone who designs current motherboards for PCs?? Not so much.
While I think that the standard off-the-shelf dell/gateway(whatever ibm
clone here) cannot be ignored for their role in making computers more
available, cheaper, and more powerful, I just don't see their uniqueness.
What is it about PCs today that separates them from ones five years ago,
or 10 years ago? Clock speed? Memory? Windows 3.1 -> Vista? More
colors? Better sound?
Are there groups of young people today that find themselves emotionally
attached to the computers of today?
Last, but not least, I think it's interesting the whole lifetime of a
technology in relation to supply and demand.
1. Best out there
2. Drops in price
3. Becomes commodity
4. Becomes obsolete
5. Has no value.
6. Time passes.
7. Becomes rare
8. Prices increase
9. Niche market is formed.
Once something becomes obsolete, it's not often preserved because it
seems to have no value, and then you're posting on goofy forums and
paying $300 years later to get your hands on one.
I apologize for my verbosity.
Keith
8:25 p.m.
On 1/24/2010 9:51 PM, Keith M wrote:
We were different, and we were better. And we had
personality.
You can find personality in almost any computer subculture if you look
hard enough. I've been involved with the "demoscene" since 1990 and no
matter what platform a demo is written on, there's a lot of personality.
I'd argue that IBM machinery definitely had a personality -- reliable,
solid, strong, definitive. Artistic or creative? No. But intriguing
all the same.
So I recently decommissioned the PII 333mhz Dell I
bought in 1998. It
was powered on for about 11 years in a row -- had uptimes of 1.5years in
some cases. Zero hardware failure. It was worth the $3k I paid for it in
1998.
But do I care about it? No. It seems hardly different from the P4 that
replaced it. Or the quad core that replaced that. Have there been
technological advances? Definitely. But there's just no soul.
This changes when you build your own. My current machine was built from
hand-picked parts meant for a specific purpose (chewing through high-def
video). I spec'd every part not only for that purpose but also in
regards to each other; the end result is something that has my
personality infused in it (and as a side effect, it is rock solid
reliable). I call it "The Combine" and it lives up to its name.
This has NOT happened w/ the Amiga because I'm
left with the feeling of,
"oh, these guys were smart." They couldn't do xyz with raw cpu power,
but instead used the graphics chip to encode/decode MFM. Or whatever.
There's a feeling of ingenuity and cleverness that is either
a> not there today
b> hidden between so many layers of abstraction that it's nearly
impossible to put your finger on it.
Cleverness is definitely alive and well but you might not be looking in
the right place. Cleverness, for me, was "making do with what you have"
and performing the seemingly impossible (see prior note about the
demoscene). Today, sometimes that is taking what a modern graphics card
can do and figuring out what it is capable of. Here's an example to
blow you away (download link provided too):
http://www.pouet.net/prod.php?which=52938 It's an executable that
produces a realistic mountain range with motion blur and music -- and
the executable is 4K. Seriously, a windows .exe that is 4K that
produces what I just described. Listing all of the tricks that made it
possible would take hundreds of lines, by several clever people.
So it is there, if you know where to look.
What is it about PCs today that separates them from
ones five years ago,
or 10 years ago? Clock speed? Memory? Windows 3.1 -> Vista? More colors?
Better sound?
Cores, actually. And that is also an interesting problem to solve (how
can you break your problem up into sections that multithread well?)
Are there groups of young people today that find
themselves emotionally
attached to the computers of today?
Yes: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demoscene
--
Jim Leonard (trixter at oldskool.org) http://www.oldskool.org/
Help our electronic games project: http://www.mobygames.com/
Or check out some trippy MindCandy at http://www.mindcandydvd.com/
A child borne of the home computer wars: http://trixter.wordpress.com/
8:58 p.m.
I'd argue that IBM machinery definitely had a
personality -- reliable,
solid, strong, definitive. ?Artistic or creative? ?No. ?But intriguing all
the same.
(vaguely related)
Except for the beige box 70s and 80s, IBM hardware has consistently
managed to get high praise from the industrial design folks.
--
Will
25 Jan
25 Jan
12:02 p.m.
Jim Leonard wrote:
You can find personality in almost any computer
subculture if you look
hard enough. I've been involved with the "demoscene" since 1990 and no
matter what platform a demo is written on, there's a lot of personality.
I'd argue that IBM machinery definitely had a personality -- reliable,
solid, strong, definitive. Artistic or creative? No. But intriguing
all the same.
Um. Can you say "OS/2"?
Doc
2 p.m.
You can find
personality in almost any computer subculture if you look
hard enough. I've been involved with the "demoscene" since 1990 and no
matter what platform a demo is written on, there's a lot of personality.
I'd argue that IBM machinery definitely had a personality -- reliable,
solid, strong, definitive. Artistic or creative? No. But intriguing
all the same.
Um. Can you say "OS/2"? 
2:08 p.m.
On Mon, 25 Jan 2010, Cameron Kaiser wrote:
OS/2 has a personality. What kind of personality is up to debate. ;-)
The PDP-11 version?
g.
--
Proud owner of F-15C 80-0007
http://www.f15sim.com - The only one of its kind.
ScarletDME - The red hot Data Management Environment
A Multi-Value database for the masses, not the classes.
http://www.scarletdme.org - Get it _today_!
You can find personality in almost any computer
subculture if you look
hard enough. I've been involved with the "demoscene" since 1990 and no
matter what platform a demo is written on, there's a lot of personality.
I'd argue that IBM machinery definitely had a personality -- reliable,
solid, strong, definitive. Artistic or creative? No. But intriguing
all the same.
Um. Can you say "OS/2"?
2:09 p.m.
Cameron Kaiser wrote:
OS/2 has a personality. What kind of personality is up to debate. ;-)
No argument from me on that score.
In 2000-2003 I was teaching IBM's Linux curricula and all of Austin's
OS/2 guys were scrambling to get Linux trained. Just about every
in-house Linux class I tought in that time-frame had one OS/2 fanatic
who couldn't care less about learning Linux. His whole motivation for
attending would be proving to me, the other students, and Gawd that
Linux will never be half the operating system OS/2 should have been.
Doc
You can find personality in almost any computer
subculture if you look
hard enough. I've been involved with the "demoscene" since 1990 and no
matter what platform a demo is written on, there's a lot of personality.
I'd argue that IBM machinery definitely had a personality -- reliable,
solid, strong, definitive. Artistic or creative? No. But intriguing
all the same.
Um. Can you say "OS/2"?
7:17 p.m.
On Monday 25 January 2010, Doc Shipley wrote:
No argument from me on that score.
In 2000-2003 I was teaching IBM's Linux curricula and all of
Austin's OS/2 guys were scrambling to get Linux trained. Just about
every in-house Linux class I tought in that time-frame had one OS/2
fanatic who couldn't care less about learning Linux. His whole
motivation for attending would be proving to me, the other students,
and Gawd that Linux will never be half the operating system OS/2
should have been.
At work, I hear the same thing from some people, except it's Solaris or
AIX instead of OS/2...
Pat
--
Purdue University Research Computing --- http://www.rcac.purdue.edu/
The Computer Refuge --- http://computer-refuge.org
2:13 p.m.
On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 4:00 PM, Cameron Kaiser <spectre at floodgap.com>wrote:
OS/2 has a personality. What kind of personality is up
to debate. ;-)
This reminds me of the old joke that made the rounds relating various
operating systems to airplanes and airports. It talked about various
passenger experiences with "DOS airlines" and such. My favorite one was
Unix... each passenger arrives at the airport with a piece of the airplane.
They gather on the tarmac and begin to assemble the airplane, all the while
arguing about what kind of airplane they're building.
With OS/2 I have a mental image of bill gates dressed up as charlie chaplin
serving drinks from one of those skinny airplane refreshment carts.
brian
2:26 p.m.
On 25 Jan 2010 at 14:00, Cameron Kaiser wrote:
Sniping aside, I recall OS/2 with fondness, but most of my experience
goes no further than 2.1. If you laid out the long green for the PTI
kit, development was a pleasant experience. The documentation was
well organized and very accurate (and on real paper), technical
support was prompt and courteous and you didn't have to beg for
updates.
After Warp, things got pretty crufty and it wasn't as much fun.
Perhaps that's the case with all operating systems--they don't age
gracefully.
--Chuck
Um. Can
you say "OS/2"?
OS/2 has a personality. What kind of personality is up to debate. ;-) 
3:47 p.m.
New subject: OS/2 (was Re: Museums)
On Jan 25, 2010, at 2:26 PM, "Chuck Guzis" <cclist at sydex.com> wrote:
On 25 Jan 2010 at 14:00, Cameron Kaiser wrote:
Sniping aside, I recall OS/2 with fondness, but most of my experience
goes no further than 2.1. If you laid out the long green for the PTI
kit, development was a pleasant experience. The documentation was
well organized and very accurate (and on real paper), technical
support was prompt and courteous and you didn't have to beg for
updates.
After Warp, things got pretty crufty and it wasn't as much fun.
Perhaps that's the case with all operating systems--they don't age
gracefully.
--Chuck
It occurs to me that OS/2 is one of the OSes I have yet to spend an
appreciable amount of time with that I keep meaning to (another
example being VMS...)
Where would you guys suggest starting if I wanted to get a good feel
for it? (what versions, what hardware, what fun software to play
around with...)
Heck, where would one get a legit copy of this these days?
- Josh
Um.
Can you say "OS/2"?
OS/2 has a personality. What kind of personality is up to debate. ;-) 
4:19 p.m.
New subject: OS/2 (was Re: Museums)
-----Original Message-----
From: cctalk-bounces at classiccmp.org [mailto:cctalk-bounces at classiccmp.org]
On Behalf Of Josh Dersch
Sent: Tuesday, 26 January 2010 10:48 AM
To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts
Subject: OS/2 (was Re: Museums)
It occurs to me that OS/2 is one of the OSes I have
yet to spend an
appreciable amount of time with that I keep meaning to (another
example being VMS...)
Where would you guys suggest starting if I wanted to
get a good feel
for it? (what versions, what hardware, what fun software to play
around with...)
Heck, where would one get a legit copy of this these
days?
Warp 4 (Warp 3 at a pinch) for the original, else you can by eComStation at
http://www.ecomstation.com/
Warp turns up regularly at eBay
As far as hardware, it isn't too demanding and will run on most modern PC's
- drivers aren't such a big issue as there are generics available.
My Warp 4.52 box is a 233MHz Pentium with 64mb RAM and an 8gb drive - more
than sufficient for the task!
For software, go to Hobbes - http://hobbes.nmsu.edu/
OS/2 still remains my one of my favourite OS's to this day.
Cheers,
Lance Lyon
http://www.ferriesofsydney.com
http://www.savethebaragoola.com
http://www.commodore128.org
26 Jan
26 Jan
6:05 p.m.
New subject: OS/2 (was Re: Museums)
Lance Lyon wrote:
-----Original Message-----
From: cctalk-bounces at classiccmp.org [mailto:cctalk-bounces at classiccmp.org]
On Behalf Of Josh Dersch
Sent: Tuesday, 26 January 2010 10:48 AM
To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts
Subject: OS/2 (was Re: Museums)
Warp4 would have problems with any current hardware because of ACPI and
large drives. Video may also be a problem if you need anything other then
VGA OS/2 Warp is best on IBM PS/2. But OS/2 Warp (3 or 4) can do very well
on just about anything from a 486 to a P4
It occurs to me that OS/2 is one of the OSes I
have yet to spend an
appreciable amount of time with that I keep meaning to (another
example being VMS...)
Where would you guys suggest starting if I wanted
to get a good feel
for it? (what versions, what hardware, what fun software to play
around with...)
Heck, where would one get a legit copy of this
these days?
Warp 4 (Warp 3 at a pinch) for the original, else you can by eComStation at
http://www.ecomstation.com/
Warp turns up regularly at eBay
As far as hardware, it isn't too demanding and will run on most modern PC's
- drivers aren't such a big issue as there are generics available.
My Warp 4.52 box is a 233MHz Pentium with 64mb RAM and an 8gb drive - more
than sufficient for the task!
That is great hardware for OS/2. Pre- OS/2 2.0 versions (1.0 - 1.3) are
very hardware selective. 2.0 was the first 32 bit version and was more
tolerant of non-IBM hardware. Still PS/2's are the best hardware for OS/2.
I have run Warp 4 on as modern as a Pentium Mobile T42 laptop with 2GB of
RAM. And I have run it on a Gateway 486 with just 4MB RAM (though it ran
much better with 16MB). Beyond that you would pretty much need the newest
version of OS/2 (eComStation) for a successful install because of problems
with the size of drives and RAM in current systems.
For software, go to Hobbes - http://hobbes.nmsu.edu/
The best repository for OS/2 software.
OS/2 still remains my one of my favourite OS's to this day.
Mine as well, but I'm running the eComStation version on all my machines
now because of the better hardware support out of the box, including dual
core support.
Mark
27 Jan
27 Jan
2:40 p.m.
Forgive the dated reply.
Jim Leonard wrote:
Very cool. I guess I didn't know that there were still people involved
in creating demos.
Thanks for your post.
Keith
On 1/24/2010 9:51 PM, Keith M wrote:
Very cool. I've always liked the Amiga demos and was amazed with the
things that they could do. I would get these foreign demos and read
about these crazy copy parties/demo parties in Europe and always
wondered what going to one would be like.
We were different, and we were better. And we had
personality.
You can find personality in almost any computer subculture if you look
hard enough. I've been involved with the "demoscene" since 1990 and no
matter what platform a demo is written on, there's a lot of personality. Are there
groups of young people today that find themselves emotionally
attached to the computers of today?
Yes: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demoscene 
1 Mar
1 Mar
7:04 a.m.
More specifically, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.kkrieger
Play that one.
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 12:40 AM, Keith <keithvz at verizon.net> wrote:
Forgive the dated reply.
Jim Leonard wrote:
Very cool. I guess I didn't know that there were still people involved in
creating demos.
Thanks for your post.
Keith
On 1/24/2010 9:51 PM, Keith M wrote:
Very cool. I've always liked the Amiga demos and was amazed with the things
that they could do. I would get these foreign demos and read about these
crazy copy parties/demo parties in Europe and always wondered what going to
one would be like.
Are there groups of young people today that find themselves emotionally
We were different, and we were better. And we had
personality.
You can find personality in almost any computer subculture if you look
hard enough. I've been involved with the "demoscene" since 1990 and no
matter what platform a demo is written on, there's a lot of personality.
attached
to the computers of today?
Yes: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demoscene
25 Jan
25 Jan
8:19 a.m.
Are there
groups of young people today that find themselves emotionally attached to the computers of
today?
There will be - definitely.
Human nature does not change, generation to generation.
8:27 a.m.
Yeah really. I'm not sure who wrote the message
before Will's reply,
but to that person: ever hear of the iPod/iPhone? Or of Crackberry
addiction? The young (and old too) are perhaps MORE emotionally
attached to their computers than the rest of us ever were to our
minicomputers, Altairs, and Apple IIs. But, the definition of
"computer" changed.
PS - That's also why one of our exhibits (during our next expansion
phase) will focus on "modern history" - stuff that's not vintage but
still interesting and someday historic.
24 Jan
24 Jan
9:04 p.m.
On Jan 24, 2010, at 10:51 PM, Keith M wrote:
But there's just something about Apple that I just
can't stand.
I'm not sure if it's the elitist attitude, or the prices, or the
forced-lock-ins.
What lock-ins would those be, specifically? My main desktop
machine is (right now) a Mac, because it is (right now) the best way
to get a very fast UNIX machine on a desktop. I suffer no lock-ins
of any kind.
-Dave
--
Dave McGuire
Port Charlotte, FL
10:40 p.m.
Dave McGuire wrote:
On Jan 24, 2010, at 10:51 PM, Keith M wrote:
Hi Dave,
SO you admit the elitist attitude and price part? :)
For as long as I've been on the internet, you think I would have learned
by now to avoid posting flame-bait like that.
There are tons of ipod/itunes and iphone issues abound (see ongoing
Sherman Antitrust Act lawsuits, like slattery vs apple. This suit has
been renamed, and I'm too lazy to find it). If you've ever own an ipod,
you know exactly what the problem is. You must use itunes to manage
your ipod, and it only manages your ipod. Want to just load mp3s onto
your ipod without itunes? You can't do it (w/o running 3rd party
unsupported software that risks damaging the stability of your ipod).
Every other mp3 player sold(OK, I'm probably pushing my luck here)
supports simply copying the .mp3s directly onto the player. Proprietary
.AAC extensions, DRM issues, problems w/ corrupted ipods and getting
music that you paid for off it. Moving/switching/upgrading ipods. Apple
charging for removing drm, etc.
I was mainly talking about the hardware<---->OS locks. According to the
license agreement for OSX, you must install OSX on Apple Hardware. If
your apple hardware breaks, you have to buy more, expensive, apple
hardware to replace it. You are forced to buy their hardware to upgrade.
Completely different situation with Windows, Linux, and so on. You can
use any available (compatible) hardware, and if my dell breaks, I buy a
new Dell, Gateway, Sony, etc etc etc.
I don't know about video cards, etc, but the pure number of hardware
options available for Windows/Linux users simply kills any mac offering.
Isn't simply having much more choice about what hardware to use better
than being given a smaller group to choose from?
http://www.pcworld.com/article/181200/bad_apple_five_classic_apple_marketin…
Has this stuff changed recently?
Keith
But there's just something about Apple that I
just can't stand. I'm
not sure if it's the elitist attitude, or the prices, or the
forced-lock-ins.
What lock-ins would those be, specifically? My main desktop machine
is (right now) a Mac, because it is (right now) the best way to get a
very fast UNIX machine on a desktop. I suffer no lock-ins of any kind.
-Dave
25 Jan
25 Jan
7:36 a.m.
The problem I've found with all that choice is that it's choice of trash, garbage
and crap. PC hardware has become such a commodity market that there doesn't seem to
be any quality to it, no matter how much you pay. It's assumed to be a consumable
that you'll throw away and replace in six months or a year.
I'm pretty happy with my PowerBook G4 and my dual G4 desktops. Yes, they're no
longer made, but they work great for everything I want. They are useful appliances to
support me in playing with the computers I really care about. -- Ian
________________________________________
From: cctalk-bounces at classiccmp.org [cctalk-bounces at classiccmp.org] On Behalf Of
Keith M [keithvz at verizon.net]
Sent: Sunday, January 24, 2010 10:40 PM
To: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts
Subject: Re: Museums
Dave McGuire wrote:
On Jan 24, 2010, at 10:51 PM, Keith M wrote:
Hi Dave,
SO you admit the elitist attitude and price part? :)
For as long as I've been on the internet, you think I would have learned
by now to avoid posting flame-bait like that.
There are tons of ipod/itunes and iphone issues abound (see ongoing
Sherman Antitrust Act lawsuits, like slattery vs apple. This suit has
been renamed, and I'm too lazy to find it). If you've ever own an ipod,
you know exactly what the problem is. You must use itunes to manage
your ipod, and it only manages your ipod. Want to just load mp3s onto
your ipod without itunes? You can't do it (w/o running 3rd party
unsupported software that risks damaging the stability of your ipod).
Every other mp3 player sold(OK, I'm probably pushing my luck here)
supports simply copying the .mp3s directly onto the player. Proprietary
.AAC extensions, DRM issues, problems w/ corrupted ipods and getting
music that you paid for off it. Moving/switching/upgrading ipods. Apple
charging for removing drm, etc.
I was mainly talking about the hardware<---->OS locks. According to the
license agreement for OSX, you must install OSX on Apple Hardware. If
your apple hardware breaks, you have to buy more, expensive, apple
hardware to replace it. You are forced to buy their hardware to upgrade.
Completely different situation with Windows, Linux, and so on. You can
use any available (compatible) hardware, and if my dell breaks, I buy a
new Dell, Gateway, Sony, etc etc etc.
I don't know about video cards, etc, but the pure number of hardware
options available for Windows/Linux users simply kills any mac offering.
Isn't simply having much more choice about what hardware to use better
than being given a smaller group to choose from?
http://www.pcworld.com/article/181200/bad_apple_five_classic_apple_marketin…
Has this stuff changed recently?
Keith
But there's just something about Apple that I
just can't stand. I'm
not sure if it's the elitist attitude, or the prices, or the
forced-lock-ins.
What lock-ins would those be, specifically? My main desktop machine
is (right now) a Mac, because it is (right now) the best way to get a
very fast UNIX machine on a desktop. I suffer no lock-ins of any kind.
-Dave
8:02 a.m.
Isn't simply having much more choice about what
hardware to use better
than being given a smaller group to choose from?
Also, emacs sucks.
--
------------------------------------ personal: http://www.cameronkaiser.com/ --
Cameron Kaiser * Floodgap Systems * www.floodgap.com * ckaiser at floodgap.com
-- armadillo, n. the act of providing weapons to a Spanish pickle. ------------
8:20 a.m.
Cameron Kaiser wrote:
Hahaha. I really should know better.
From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emacs
Eight Megabytes And Constantly Swapping
Emacs Makes A Computer Slow
Eventually Mallocs All Computer Storage
Eventually Makes All Computers Sick
alt.religion.emacs. haha.
or vi-vi-vi, 666.
What's wrong with these people? :)
Keith
Isn't
simply having much more choice about what hardware to use better
than being given a smaller group to choose from?
Also, emacs sucks.
8:32 a.m.
On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 10:20 AM, Keith <keithvz at verizon.net> wrote:
Cameron Kaiser wrote:
Emacs: the greatest operating system ever created.
:-)
brian
Isn't simply having much more choice about
what hardware to use better
Hahaha. I really should know better.
From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emacs
Eight Megabytes And Constantly Swapping
Emacs Makes A Computer Slow
Eventually Mallocs All Computer Storage
Eventually Makes All Computers Sick
alt.religion.emacs. haha.
or vi-vi-vi, 666.
What's wrong with these people? :)
than being given a smaller group to choose from?
Also, emacs sucks.
8:51 a.m.
On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 11:42 AM, William Donzelli <wdonzelli at gmail.com> wrote:
No doubt. I use both on various operating systems - there's no need
to choose one editor over the other. If I've got a C compiler and at
least an 80x24 textual interface to a session, it's virtually certain
that I have enough resources to find or build vi _and_ emacs for that
target.
Can't we all just get along? ;-)
-ethan
(come on, some
one take the bait!)
No thanks. Some of us had enough religion, with last week's
Microsoft/Unix fapfest.
10:20 a.m.
On Jan 25, 2010, at 11:42 AM, William Donzelli wrote:
"Religion", of course, being the term Windows fanboys use to
dismiss anything they don't like, even when it's presented with
proof. That's immature, disrespectful, unprofessional, and it makes
one out to be a bit of a dick.
Here's your proof, once again:
ns$ uptime
1:17pm up 1062 day(s), 14:23, 1 user, load average: 2.05, 1.65,
1.85
ns$
-Dave
--
Dave McGuire
Port Charlotte, FL
(come on, some
one take the bait!)
No thanks. Some of us had enough religion, with last week's
Microsoft/Unix fapfest.
10:27 a.m.
On Mon, 25 Jan 2010, Dave McGuire wrote:
"Religion", of course, being the term
Windows fanboys use to dismiss
anything they don't like, even when it's presented with proof. That's
immature, disrespectful, unprofessional, and it makes one out to be a bit of
a dick.
Here's your proof, once again:
ns$ uptime
1:17pm up 1062 day(s), 14:23, 1 user, load average: 2.05, 1.65, 1.85
ns$
Translation:
*fap* *fap* *fap* *fap* *fap* *fap* *fap* *fap*
g.
--
Proud owner of F-15C 80-0007
http://www.f15sim.com - The only one of its kind.
ScarletDME - The red hot Data Management Environment
A Multi-Value database for the masses, not the classes.
http://www.scarletdme.org - Get it _today_!
10:53 a.m.
On Jan 25, 2010, at 1:27 PM, Gene Buckle wrote:
AbsoLUTELY. :-) Definitely fap-worthy, if I do say so myself!
-Dave
--
Dave McGuire
Port Charlotte, FL
"Religion", of course, being the term Windows fanboys use to
dismiss anything they don't like, even when it's presented with
proof. That's immature, disrespectful, unprofessional, and it
makes one out to be a bit of a dick.
Here's your proof, once again:
ns$ uptime
1:17pm up 1062 day(s), 14:23, 1 user, load average: 2.05, 1.65,
1.85
ns$
Translation:
*fap* *fap* *fap* *fap* *fap* *fap* *fap* *fap*
11:18 a.m.
Dave McGuire wrote:
On Jan 25, 2010, at 11:42 AM, William Donzelli wrote:
"Religion", of course, being the term Windows fanboys use to dismiss
anything they don't like, even when it's presented with proof. That's
immature, disrespectful, unprofessional, and it makes one out to be a
bit of a dick.
Ah, generalization. Yes, only Windows "fanboys" use this term. Ever.
Because as you so often like to state, Windows users are all morons.
Yes, *I'm* the dick here.
(come on,
some one take the bait!)
No thanks. Some of us had enough religion, with last week's
Microsoft/Unix fapfest.
Here's your proof, once again:
ns$ uptime
1:17pm up 1062 day(s), 14:23, 1 user, load average: 2.05, 1.65, 1.85
ns$
Ah, proof, being in this case, "anecdotal evidence."
- Josh
-Dave
11:42 a.m.
On Jan 25, 2010, at 2:18 PM, Josh Dersch wrote:
"Religion", of course, being the term Windows fanboys use to
dismiss anything they don't like, even when it's presented with
proof. That's immature, disrespectful, unprofessional, and it
makes one out to be a bit of a dick.
Ah, generalization. Yes, only Windows "fanboys" use this term.
Ever. Because as you so often like to state, Windows users are all
morons. Yes, *I'm* the dick here.
I didn't say "only", and I certainly never called YOU a dick. Nor
would I.
You want an account on the machine to see for yourself? ;)
-Dave
--
Dave McGuire
Port Charlotte, FL
(come on, some
one take the bait!)
No thanks. Some of us had enough religion, with last week's
Microsoft/Unix fapfest. Here's
your proof, once again:
ns$ uptime
1:17pm up 1062 day(s), 14:23, 1 user, load average: 2.05,
1.65, 1.85
ns$
Ah, proof, being in this case, "anecdotal evidence." 
2:53 p.m.
On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 02:42:16PM -0500, Dave McGuire wrote:
On Jan 25, 2010, at 2:18 PM, Josh Dersch wrote:
Ah, generalization. Yes, only Windows "fanboys" use this term. Ever.
Because as you so often like to state, Windows users are all morons.
Yes, *I'm* the dick here.
I didn't say "only", and I certainly never called YOU a dick. Nor
would I.
You want an account on the machine to see for yourself? ;)
If the machine is as well patched as the uptime implies then _I_
wouldn't be handing out accounts to other people.
Want some more rain on your parade? *SCNR*
HTH,
Alex.
--
"Opportunity is missed by most people because it is dressed in overalls and
looks like work." -- Thomas A. Edison
> (come on, some one take the bait!)
No thanks. Some of us had enough religion, with last week's
Microsoft/Unix fapfest.
"Religion", of course, being the term Windows fanboys use to
dismiss anything they don't like, even when it's presented with
proof. That's immature, disrespectful, unprofessional, and it makes
one out to be a bit of a dick.
Here's your proof, once again:
ns$ uptime
1:17pm up 1062 day(s), 14:23, 1 user, load average: 2.05, 1.65,
1.85
ns$
Ah, proof, being in this case, "anecdotal evidence."
3:48 p.m.
On Jan 25, 2010, at 5:53 PM, Alexander Schreiber wrote:
You want an account on the machine to see for yourself? ;)
If the machine is as well patched as the uptime implies then _I_
wouldn't be handing out accounts to other people.
I know and trust Josh, and the machine is reasonably well-
patched. Your assumptions are showing.
Not getting wet here, sorry man. Nice try
though!
-Dave
--
Dave McGuire
Port Charlotte, FL
ns$ uptime
1:17pm up 1062 day(s), 14:23, 1 user, load average: 2.05,
1.65,
1.85
ns$
Ah, proof, being in this case, "anecdotal evidence." Want some more rain on your parade? *SCNR*
26 Jan
26 Jan
6:21 a.m.
New subject: Unix/Windows/OS Fap Fests
"strange game. The only winning move is not to play."
"........How about a nice game of chess?"
Seriously this is tiresome and it's usually the same players over and over again. You
are not proving your technical l33tness, you are just annoying the rest of us who wish to
discuss vintage computing.
25 Jan
25 Jan
11:40 a.m.
Dave McGuire wrote:
Here's your proof, once again:
ns$ uptime
1:17pm up 1062 day(s), 14:23, 1 user, load average: 2.05, 1.65, 1.85
ns$
For home use, especially if well firewalled off, that's just pure
awesomeness.
For production use, not so much, means that you don't know whether this
box will boot up or not if it goes down hard. It is possible for blocks
to have gone back, blocks on which the kernel or other startup related
files may be mapped - unless you were the guy that set it up and tested
it, you don't know whether it will boot up and bring up services,
whether you need to add routes to make it work, etc. - i.e. the original
builder left the job for more cash, etc..
It also means that it hasn't been patched in that many days and is
likely vulnerable to lots of attacks. Despite that, it's quite
impressive. :-) Well played sir.
11:49 a.m.
On Jan 25, 2010, at 2:40 PM, Ray Arachelian wrote:
Good point, but this isn't my first BBQ my friend...There's a cold
spare in the rack.
Here's
your proof, once again:
ns$ uptime
1:17pm up 1062 day(s), 14:23, 1 user, load average: 2.05, 1.65, 1.85
ns$
For home use, especially if well firewalled off, that's just pure
awesomeness.
For production use, not so much, means that you don't know whether
this
box will boot up or not if it goes down hard. It is possible for
blocks
to have gone back, blocks on which the kernel or other startup related
files may be mapped - unless you were the guy that set it up and
tested
it, you don't know whether it will boot up and bring up services,
whether you need to add routes to make it work, etc. - i.e. the
original
builder left the job for more cash, etc.. It also means that it hasn't been patched in that
many days and is
likely vulnerable to lots of attacks. Despite that, it's quite
impressive. :-) Well played sir.
It's been patched, just nothing that requires a reboot. And as
you know, most UNIX-based OSs rarely require reboots for patching.
For example, I've replaced the Ethernet interface drivers on this
machine, hot, without rebooting.
-Dave
--
Dave McGuire
Port Charlotte, FL
12:04 p.m.
On Jan 25, 2010, at 11:49 AM, Dave McGuire <mcguire at neurotica.com>
wrote:
On Jan 25, 2010, at 2:40 PM, Ray Arachelian wrote:
Good point, but this isn't my first BBQ my friend...There's a cold
spare in the rack.
I can (and do) replace video drivers on my Windows 7 boxes without
rebooting :) same for network and just about anything else.
Now if I could just beat some sense into the windows update guys so
they stop marking fixes to IE as "reboot required" when they're
clearly not...
Josh
Here's your proof, once again:
ns$ uptime
1:17pm up 1062 day(s), 14:23, 1 user, load average: 2.05, 1.65, 1.85
ns$
For home use, especially if well firewalled off, that's just pure
awesomeness.
For production use, not so much, means that you don't know whether
this
box will boot up or not if it goes down hard. It is possible for
blocks
to have gone back, blocks on which the kernel or other startup
related
files may be mapped - unless you were the guy that set it up and
tested
it, you don't know whether it will boot up and bring up services,
whether you need to add routes to make it work, etc. - i.e. the
original
builder left the job for more cash, etc.. It also means that it hasn't been patched in
that many days and is
likely vulnerable to lots of attacks. Despite that, it's quite
impressive. :-) Well played sir.
It's been patched, just nothing that requires a reboot. And as you
know, most UNIX-based OSs rarely require reboots for patching. For
example, I've replaced the Ethernet interface drivers on this
machine, hot, without rebooting.
-Dave
--
Dave McGuire
Port Charlotte, FL
12:11 p.m.
On Jan 25, 2010, at 3:04 PM, Josh Dersch wrote:
Ok, that's cool. But..
It's been
patched, just nothing that requires a reboot. And as
you know, most UNIX-based OSs rarely require reboots for
patching. For example, I've replaced the Ethernet interface
drivers on this machine, hot, without rebooting.
I can (and do) replace video drivers on my Windows 7 boxes without
rebooting :) same for network and just about anything else. Now if I could just beat some sense into the windows
update guys so
they stop marking fixes to IE as "reboot required" when they're
clearly not...
...this is what I was going to ask about. Why do they do that?
-Dave
--
Dave McGuire
Port Charlotte, FL
12:24 p.m.
On Jan 25, 2010, at 12:11 PM, Dave McGuire <mcguire at neurotica.com>
wrote:
Wish I knew. My guess is "paranoia.". For IE, for example they may
not be able to reliably find and restart every running app that's
using an IE component (HTML renderer, etc) or they just don't trust
other apps, etc. They just want to make 100% sure that the patch gets
applied, upime be damned. We have enough problems getting people to
keep their machines up to date as it is. Most malware attacks
vectors that have been fixed for months, if not years...
Or they could just be chuckleheads.
Josh
On Jan 25, 2010, at 3:04 PM, Josh Dersch wrote:
Ok, that's cool. But..
Very cool. And if the driver crashes it just gets restarted, so the
system doesn't go down due to a horrible ATI driver...
It's
been patched, just nothing that requires a reboot. And as
you know, most UNIX-based OSs rarely require reboots for
patching. For example, I've replaced the Ethernet interface
drivers on this machine, hot, without rebooting.
I can (and do) replace video drivers on my Windows 7 boxes without
rebooting :) same for network and just about anything else. Now if I could just beat some sense into the
windows update guys so
they stop marking fixes to IE as "reboot required" when they're
clearly not...
...this is what I was going to ask about. Why do they do that?
-Dave
--
Dave McGuire
Port Charlotte, FL
2:50 p.m.
On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 01:20:48PM -0500, Dave McGuire wrote:
On Jan 25, 2010, at 11:42 AM, William Donzelli wrote:
"Religion", of course, being the term Windows fanboys use to dismiss
anything they don't like, even when it's presented with proof. That's
immature, disrespectful, unprofessional, and it makes one out to be a bit
of a dick.
Here's your proof, once again:
ns$ uptime
1:17pm up 1062 day(s), 14:23, 1 user, load average: 2.05, 1.65,
1.85
IP address please[0], there probably were a few remote kernel bugs in
the last 3 years. Yes, it is nice that $unixoid_OS can stay up for 3
years, but uptime alone is mostly only good for d?cksize wars - and 3
years probably doesn't impress the old VMS hands anyway. ;-)
Regards,
Alex.
[0] nmap should deduce the OS remotely well enough
--
"Opportunity is missed by most people because it is dressed in overalls and
looks like work." -- Thomas A. Edison
(come on,
some one take the bait!)
No thanks. Some of us had enough religion, with last week's
Microsoft/Unix fapfest.
3:48 p.m.
On Jan 25, 2010, at 5:50 PM, Alexander Schreiber wrote:
"Religion", of course, being the term Windows fanboys use to
dismiss
anything they don't like, even when it's presented with proof.
That's
immature, disrespectful, unprofessional, and it makes one out to
be a bit
of a dick.
Here's your proof, once again:
ns$ uptime
1:17pm up 1062 day(s), 14:23, 1 user, load average: 2.05, 1.65,
1.85
IP address please[0], there probably were a few remote kernel bugs in
the last 3 years.
Do you really want to make a run at it?
--
Dave McGuire
Port Charlotte, FL
(come on, some
one take the bait!)
No thanks. Some of us had enough religion, with last week's
Microsoft/Unix fapfest. Yes, it is nice that $unixoid_OS can stay up for 3
years, but uptime alone is mostly only good for d?cksize wars -
Really? I find uptime to be good for a few other things as well,
like keeping customers happy, keeping my job, keeping my cell phone
from ringing at 3AM, etc etc.
and 3
years probably doesn't impress the old VMS hands anyway. ;-)
Being an old VMS hand myself, I think it's only a moderately
impressive uptime, but I myself am not actually impressed at all,
because that's the kind of reliability I demand from my equipment.
Amazingly, I also expect my car to not randomly stall or catch on
fire while I'm driving down the road.
-Dave
11:56 p.m.
On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 06:48:05PM -0500, Dave McGuire wrote:
Well, usually the thing that gets in the way of high uptimes these days
in proper systems is not the machine crashing, but either upgrades or
security patches, including ones were a reboot is needed to run a new
kernel. Another thing killing uptime is the bloody hardware failing.
Modern hardware, and especially disks, still fail too damn often. Have
enough machines up and running and you'll lose a disk almost every day.
And that is with the good (high MTBF) stuff.
On Jan 25, 2010, at 5:50 PM, Alexander Schreiber
wrote:
IP address please[0], there probably were a few remote kernel bugs in
the last 3 years.
Do you really want to make a run at it?
For legal reasons: no. And if that didn't get in the way of it, not
without the express permission of the owner, for not wanting to act like
a digital hooligan.
> (come on, some one take the bait!)
No thanks. Some of us had enough religion, with last week's
Microsoft/Unix fapfest.
"Religion", of course, being the term Windows fanboys use to
dismiss
anything they don't like, even when it's presented with proof.
That's
immature, disrespectful, unprofessional, and it makes one out to be a
bit
of a dick.
Here's your proof, once again:
ns$ uptime
1:17pm up 1062 day(s), 14:23, 1 user, load average: 2.05, 1.65,
1.85 Yes, it is
nice that $unixoid_OS can stay up for 3
years, but uptime alone is mostly only good for d?cksize wars -
Really? I find uptime to be good for a few other things as well, like
keeping customers happy, keeping my job, keeping my cell phone from
ringing at 3AM, etc etc. and 3
years probably doesn't impress the old VMS hands anyway. ;-)
Being an old VMS hand myself, I think it's only a moderately
impressive uptime, but I myself am not actually impressed at all,
because that's the kind of reliability I demand from my equipment. Amazingly, I also expect my car to not randomly
stall or catch on fire
while I'm driving down the road.
Different rules apply there. Cars randomly catching on fire tends to be
expensive for the manufacturer, disks dying after two years doesn't,
usually.
Regards,
Alex.
--
"Opportunity is missed by most people because it is dressed in overalls and
looks like work." -- Thomas A. Edison
26 Jan
26 Jan
12:17 a.m.
On Jan 26, 2010, at 2:56 AM, Alexander Schreiber wrote:
For legal reasons: no. And if that didn't get in the way of it, not
without the express permission of the owner, for not wanting to act
like
a digital hooligan.
Ahh, my faith in you is restored. ;) But I did just upgrade sshd
on that machine just in case! =)
Heh, unfortunately! ;)
But what I was really referring to is operating systems needing to
be preemptively rebooted to keep them stable, and other absurd stuff
like that. Nobody should put up with that. The fact that many
people DO put up with it doesn't change the fact that it's just plain
silly.
-Dave
--
Dave McGuire
Port Charlotte, FL
IP address please[0], there probably were a few remote
kernel
bugs in
the last 3 years.
Do you really want to make a run at it? Well, usually the thing that gets in the way of high
uptimes these
days
in proper systems is not the machine crashing, but either upgrades or
security patches, including ones were a reboot is needed to run a new
kernel.
The latter situation is the only case where I end up doing it.
With modern kernels being so ridiculously module-oriented, I almost
never really need to reboot, though.
Another thing killing uptime is the bloody hardware
failing.
I generally don't experience that.
Modern hardware, and especially disks, still fail too
damn often. Have
enough machines up and running and you'll lose a disk almost every
day.
And that is with the good (high MTBF) stuff.
Yes. Years ago, I managed a network of over 1,000 machines
(mostly Sun SPARCstation-2s with some -5s sprinkled about) and I did
see some disk failures. They involved downtime, a screwdriver, the
spinning up of Exabyte tapes, and a lot of cursing in the
datacenter. Very annoying. Nowadays, thank heaven, I just replace
the failed drive and watch the array resync while sipping a latte and
reading an issue of EDN, and the customer never knows it happened.
I've done rolling upgrades of system disks (as in, completely
replaced boot volumes) without shutting machines down that way. I
rotate drives out of service *usually* before they fail, but when
they do, there's no downtime involved. I very, very rarely reboot
most of the computers that I'm responsible for because, most of the
time, it just isn't required.
Amazingly, I
also expect my car to not randomly stall or catch
on fire
while I'm driving down the road.
Different rules apply there. Cars randomly catching on fire tends
to be
expensive for the manufacturer, disks dying after two years doesn't,
usually. 
7:50 p.m.
On 1/26/10 12:17 AM, "Dave McGuire" <mcguire at neurotica.com> wrote:
Heh, unfortunately! ;)
But what I was really referring to is operating systems needing to
be preemptively rebooted to keep them stable, and other absurd stuff
like that. Nobody should put up with that. The fact that many
people DO put up with it doesn't change the fact that it's just plain
silly.
-Dave
I am currently jousting with purchasing at work, trying to get a macpro
instead of a standard windows machine. I'm sick and tired of the "lets
remotely reboot all the windows machines 2x a week with no advance warning"
tango. That and having to reboot the bloody thing because it has become
unstable. My mac pro at home running macosx is just plain stable. If they
made a niagra based workstation and the software I need to run was available
for it, that is what I'd be trying to get.
2:23 p.m.
On Jan 25, 2010, at 5:15 PM, Brian Lanning wrote:
Good grief, guys. Are :q and ^X^C really so difficult to remember?
-Dave
--
Dave McGuire
Port Charlotte, FL
PS. I hate vi
since I can never remember how exit the $#%! thing!
Lol, I have the same problem with emacs. I just kill the process from
another terminal window.
2:24 p.m.
On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 4:23 PM, Dave McGuire <mcguire at neurotica.com> wrote:
On Jan 25, 2010, at 5:15 PM, Brian Lanning wrote:
The first one is easy for me to remember. The other one is just too arcane.
:-D
brian
PS. I hate vi since I can never remember how
exit the $#%! thing!
Lol, I have the same problem with emacs. I just kill the process from
another terminal window.
Good grief, guys. Are :q and ^X^C really so difficult to remember?
5:01 p.m.
PS. I hate vi since I can never remember how exit the
$#%! thing!
Admiral Ackbar: "It's a TRAP!"
--
------------------------------------ personal: http://www.cameronkaiser.com/ --
Cameron Kaiser * Floodgap Systems * www.floodgap.com * ckaiser at floodgap.com
-- :wq! -----------------------------------------------------------------------
26 Jan
26 Jan
12:10 a.m.
With regard to Museums there's something they could do to help the collector
community. There's a tendency for them to accept any and every thing and
just put it into storage. They only pick items to restore and display with
the widest appeal. Many exhibits are static insofar as they don't run.
Collectors in the main have very little storage but do attempt to get what
they have running. Is it not better for the museums to loan out systems to
collectors who will get them going again and either return or keep them in
working order.
Most computer museums do want volunteers but that involves traveling to the
museum site to work. Worse still they tend to put technically competent
people to work cleaning floors and painting buildings.
Regards
Rod Smallwood
-----Original Message-----
From: cctech-bounces at classiccmp.org [mailto:cctech-bounces at classiccmp.org]
On Behalf Of Ben
Sent: 25 January 2010 22:12
To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts
Subject: Re: Museums
Keith wrote:
Brian Lanning wrote:
Long live Elvis. :)
Emacs: the greatest operating system ever created.
:-)
:) indeed.
I was always a vi man myself.
(come on, some one take the bait!) Keith
PS. I hate vi since I can never remember how exit the $#%! thing!
9:41 a.m.
With regard to Museums there's something they
could do to help the collector
community. There's a tendency for them to accept any and every thing and
just put it into storage.
I am confused - I think you have things reversed. Museums tend to be
the picky ones, and taking in new artifacts results in a fair amount
of red tape in committee, with a good number of the offered artifacts
getting rejected. The people that accept any and everything are
typically private collectors that are still new to the game and have
not figured out that rampant unbounded collecting is a recipe for
disaster.
--
Will
9:55 a.m.
On 1/26/10 12:10 AM, Rod Smallwood wrote:
With regard to Museums there's something they could do to help the collector
community. There's a tendency for them to accept any and every thing and
just put it into storage.
As one of the curators at the Computer History Museum, one of the people
responsible for making decisions on what to accept into the collection, I
respectfully disagree. Actually, very little of what is offered is accepted.
They only pick items to restore and display with
the widest appeal. Many exhibits are static insofar as they don't run.
Collectors in the main have very little storage but do attempt to get what
they have running.
Is it not better for the museums to loan out systems to
collectors who will get them going again and either return or keep them in
working order.
Ask a curator at the Smithsonian or the British Science Museum if you can take
one of their artifacts home to play with, and see how far you get. What you will
find out is there is a big difference between a computer club with a public
collection, and institutions following AAM guidelines.
Most computer museums do want volunteers but that
involves traveling to the
museum site to work. Worse still they tend to put technically competent
people to work cleaning floors and painting buildings.
As opposed to 'playing' with the artifacts?
Volunteers at CHM working with the collection must attend artifact training.
The first thing that they learn is even though the gear they see here is stuff
that they've used in the past, once it is accepted into the permanent collection
it has to be treated in ways to make sure it survives as long as possible
(hopefully hundreds of years). This includes not touching it with bare hands, etc.
There is absolutely no way that established museum practices would allow what
you are suggesting to occur.
I would suggest people look at the guidelines posted on the American Association of
Museums site with regards to protocols for artifact handling.
10:26 a.m.
Ask a curator at the Smithsonian or the British
Science Museum if you
can take one of their artifacts home to play with, and see how far you
get. What you will find out is there is a big difference between a
computer club with a public
collection, and institutions following AAM guidelines.
I agree.
Last time I checked, there are around 15 "real" computer museums in
America -- basically it's the CHM, and everyone else. I can't speak for
the others, but we in MARCH are, as Al said, a club with a public
collection. The only time we wear gloves is when cleaning artifacts
covered in you-don't-want-to-know-what (our PDP-8 came from a barn, so....)
Luckily, there is room for both kinds of museum. Our hobby is
incredibly fortunate to have a professional organization like the CHM.
I visit there every couple of years (usually when VCF West happens) and
it's a highlight of my year. Where else can you see parts of machines
from Babbage or the Moore School, and then play
SpaceWar on a restored
PDP-1? (Answer: No place else.)
But if you're just a family man who wants to show your kid BASIC a
Commodore 64, then club-run museums are the way to go. Conversely, at
CHM's Visible Storage, you can't * use * anything.
I always tell our visitors that if they're seeking a professional,
Smithsonian-like museum experience, then it's totally worthwhile to go
visit CHM in California. Personally I love it out there. If they ask
about documentation then I even tell them about Al and Bitsavers.
Presumably, if Al, Dag Spicer, and the others at CHM encounter visitors
who want to do more hands-on, then I assume they inform the visitors
about options such as Digibarn, VCF, etc.
So it works both ways. Different scales/scopes of museums cater to
different audiences.
What works for us in MARCH is, as hackers say, "the hands-on imperative."
Of course that changes somewhat with our larger / rarer / older artifacts.
11:21 a.m.
On 1/26/10 10:26 AM, Evan Koblentz wrote:
Presumably, if Al, Dag Spicer, and the others at CHM
encounter visitors
who want to do more hands-on, then I assume they inform the visitors
about options such as Digibarn, VCF, etc.
So it works both ways. Different scales/scopes of museums cater to
different audiences.
What works for us in MARCH is, as hackers say, "the hands-on imperative."
Of course that changes somewhat with our larger / rarer / older artifacts.
I do try to explain the differences when people ask why we don't have more running
hardware. It is a challenge and requires a team of dedicated volunteers to keep the
PDP-1 in good shape to be shown as a scheduled exhibit, for example.
What we hope CHM will be in the future is the place where techies and non-techies can
experience our computing heritage. We'll be very busy this coming year building a
world-
class exhibit on the history of computing that will be the next phase in the
institution's
evolution, and I am continuing to develop CHM's software and documentation
collections.
1:21 p.m.
I do try to explain the differences when people ask
why we don't have more
running hardware.
What about emulation? That sounds like something the museum may want to
sponsor (with its copious spare cash, natch ;-).
--
------------------------------------ personal: http://www.cameronkaiser.com/ --
Cameron Kaiser * Floodgap Systems * www.floodgap.com * ckaiser at floodgap.com
-- Falling in love is no way of getting to know someone. -- Sheila Sullivan ---
27 Jan
27 Jan
1:48 p.m.
In article <4B5F40C9.8010603 at bitsavers.org>,
Al Kossow <aek at bitsavers.org> writes:
I do try to explain the differences when people ask
why we don't
have more running hardware. It is a challenge and requires a team of
dedicated volunteers to ke ep the PDP-1 in good shape to be shown as
a scheduled exhibit, for example.
Don't forget that you can point them to pdp planet where they can get
a free login on the DECsystem machines they have.
--
"The Direct3D Graphics Pipeline" -- DirectX 9 draft available for download
<http://legalizeadulthood.wordpress.com/the-direct3d-graphics-pipeline/>
Legalize Adulthood! <http://legalizeadulthood.wordpress.com>
26 Jan
26 Jan
12:49 p.m.
Ask a curator at the Smithsonian or the British Science Museum if you
can take
one of their artifacts home to play with, and see how far you get.
What you will
find out is there is a big difference between a computer club with a
public
collection, and institutions following AAM guidelines.
Luckily the Berne Museum of Kommunikation does not use these guidelines,
or the Liltih's Medos OS source code would still be lingering on a
cartridge for very obscure and unreliable disksystem in a very
propriatary format.
Sometimes mere hobbyists do make contributions that museums are
unable/unwilling to deliver !
Jos Dreesen
25 Jan
25 Jan
2:36 p.m.
On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 10:32:41AM -0600, Brian Lanning wrote:
On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 10:20 AM, Keith <keithvz at
verizon.net> wrote:
Too bad the editor sucked.
Cameron Kaiser wrote:
Emacs: the greatest operating system ever created. Isn't simply having much more choice about
what hardware to use better
Hahaha. I really should know better.
From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emacs
Eight Megabytes And Constantly Swapping
Emacs Makes A Computer Slow
Eventually Mallocs All Computer Storage
Eventually Makes All Computers Sick
alt.religion.emacs. haha.
or vi-vi-vi, 666.
What's wrong with these people? :)
than being given a smaller group to choose from?
Also, emacs sucks.
:-)
;-)
Although honestly, I use both editors (vi & emacs): emacs for typical
coding and LaTeX sessions, vi for quick edit jobs, plain text and when
wielding uid 0.
Regards,
Alex.
--
"Opportunity is missed by most people because it is dressed in overalls and
looks like work." -- Thomas A. Edison
12:10 p.m.
lol!
________________________________
From: Doc Shipley <doc at vaxen.net>
To: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts <cctalk at classiccmp.org>
Sent: Mon, January 25, 2010 2:05:43 PM
Subject: Re: Museums
Cameron Kaiser wrote:
emacs would be an awesome operating system, if it had a decent text editor....
Doc
Isn't
simply having much more choice about what hardware to use better than being given a
smaller group to choose from?
Also, emacs sucks.
8:21 a.m.
I'm a self-avowed former Apple hater, so let me address some of the Apple hate below.
;)
________________________________
From: Keith M <keithvz at verizon.net>
To: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts <cctalk at classiccmp.org>
Sent: Mon, January 25, 2010 12:40:14 AM
Subject: Re: Museums
There are tons of ipod/itunes and iphone issues abound
(see ongoing Sherman Antitrust Act lawsuits, like slattery vs apple. >This suit has
been renamed, and I'm too lazy to find it). If you've ever own an ipod, you know
exactly what the problem is. You >must use itunes to manage your ipod, and it only
manages your ipod. Want to just load mp3s onto your ipod without itunes? >You
can't do it (w/o running 3rd party unsupported software that risks damaging the
stability of your ipod). Every other mp3 >player sold(OK, I'm probably pushing my
luck here) supports simply copying the .mp3s directly onto the player. Proprietary
>.AAC extensions, DRM issues, problems w/ corrupted ipods and getting music that you
paid for off it. Moving/switching>/upgrading ipods. Apple charging for removing drm,
etc.
On the other hand, the combination of the iPod/iTunes system works remarkably well. And,
my mother can use it without harassing me. From what I've seen personally, iTunes is
at least as good or better than other iTunes-like stores.
As for lawsuits, this is to be expected. Biggest player in the field = biggest target.
I was mainly talking about the hardware<---->OS
locks. According to the license agreement for OSX, you must install OSX on >Apple
Hardware. If your apple hardware breaks, you have to buy more, expensive, apple hardware
to replace it. You are forced >to buy their hardware to upgrade.
So what? OS X development is supported by the hardware sales. Apple is not selling just a
computer, they are selling a complete solution.
I don't know about video cards, etc, but the pure
number of hardware options available for Windows/Linux users simply kills any >mac
offering.
This is probably true for anything short of a Mac Tower, which has expansion slots in it.
Still need drivers of course.
Isn't simply having much more choice about what
hardware to use better than being given a smaller group to choose from?
I've seen my share of crappy white-box hardware and/or Windows PCs over the years. I
bought a turn-key solution and so far does everything I require of it.
Nobody ever talks about all the good software you get with an Apple machine. I have yet to
see anything that comes standard with a PC that approaches the quality of the iLife suite
of software. Most of that software you get is trialware garbage, whereas the Apple stuff
is fully functional. Not only that, I got Xcode with OS X, a full development suite. How
much extra do I have to pay for Visual Studio on a Windows machine?
8:53 a.m.
geoffrey oltmans wrote:
I'm a self-avowed former Apple hater, so let me
address some of the Apple hate below. ;)
So I'm really not trying to "hate" on Apple here.
It seems as long as you are willing to stay within the Apple paradigm,
then everything is nice. Everything works. I don't doubt that.
The problem comes in whenever you'd like to use your hardware/software
in a different way.
I'd like to just plug my ipod into my Windows PC, and copy my .mp3's to
it. It seems absurd to me that you can't do this. Forget the huge
bloated management application that is constantly advertising and trying
to sell you something.
I will say I've had no end to problems w/ the ipod nano I bought my wife
a few years ago. And lost songs (aka money) due to DRM issues. Serves
me right for actually paying for music, anyways.
Or maybe you don't want the new software update for your ipod. Or maybe
you don't want to use itunes to restore a broken ipod.
There's really no choice. It vaguely reminds me of those Caribbean and
Mexican beach resort vacations. As long as you stay on the property in
the enclosed fence, everything is fine. Ignore the guys with machine
guns outside. Just do as we tell you and no one will get hurt. :)
Floomla is a decent free ipod app, btw.
BTW: Microsoft offers a number of free versions of Visual Studio.
Depending on the language, etc, Eclipse is a good free alternative too.
Keith
11:27 a.m.
I know you're not really hating on Apple, I was being a little tongue-in-cheek.
I haven't seen any sort of problems that you reported with iTunes, so I can't
comment on those. Maybe things are better now. My wife has a 2nd gen iPod Touch 32MB and I
have a 1 GB iPod Shuffle for when I go to the gym (actually, this is my second, the first
one was destroyed when I accidentally washed it in my gym pants, something I'd have a
hard time ascribing to Apple). I haven't really noticed iTunes trying to sell you
stuff in-your-face, excepting when you open it up since it comes up by default in the
iTunes Store rather than your library. Click a tab in your library and that's gone
pretty quick. The iTunes store has had a lot of DRM-free stuff for a while now, and I
can't really say that DRM is an Apple-only concern where it does exist.
As for my stuff, all my photos are still plain old jpegs or RAW images, all my music is in
drm-less codecs that are freely available on other platforms, my mail can be converted to
another database if I so desire... I can still run Firefox if I want to, I can still use
Microsoft Office or OpenOffice, I use Quicken, which is also available on Windows. I
recently upgraded the hard disk in my MacBook with an off-the-shelf 2.5" SATA drive
with no issues (and in fact my Time Machine backup made this the least painful hard drive
upgrade ever). I can reasonably run a lot of open software on OS X. Point being, I can
easily move out of the OS X realm into Linux or Windows if I wanted to, taking all my toys
along with me, but why do it? I'm having fun playing in this sandbox right now. Other
people might feel differently, but I don't feel like I'm hindered in any realistic
way from doing whatever it is I want, and in fact, Apple's software has made my life
with
computers less annoying.
That said, I do have a couple of quibbles: Cosmetically, I loved my white macbook when I
first got it. The slick polycarbonate shell has scratched rather easily though. The
keyboard has cracked in a couple places at the edges of the case. Both are cosmetic issues
rather than functional issues. Part of me thinks this never should have happened, but on
the flipside I'm not one to baby my laptop either. It is well-used believe me, and
aside from these two points I'd say overall I'm happy with my purchase. I think
they've at least addressed the cracking issue on the latest white cased MacBook.
As for the development software, I believe the free versions of Visual Studio are crippled
in some ways are they not? And it's nice to have a company-sanctioned IDE to use,
regardless of how nice a third parties' IDE might be.
________________________________
From: Keith <keithvz at verizon.net>
To: General at olddell.com; On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts <cctalk at classiccmp.org>
Sent: Mon, January 25, 2010 10:53:21 AM
Subject: Re: Museums
geoffrey oltmans wrote:
I'm a self-avowed former Apple hater, so let me
address some of the Apple hate below. ;)
So I'm really not trying to "hate" on Apple here.
It seems as long as you are willing to stay within the Apple paradigm, then everything is
nice. Everything works. I don't doubt that.
The problem comes in whenever you'd like to use your hardware/software in a different
way.
I'd like to just plug my ipod into my Windows PC, and copy my .mp3's to it. It
seems absurd to me that you can't do this. Forget the huge bloated management
application that is constantly advertising and trying to sell you something.
I will say I've had no end to problems w/ the ipod nano I bought my wife a few years
ago. And lost songs (aka money) due to DRM issues. Serves me right for actually paying
for music, anyways.
Or maybe you don't want the new software update for your ipod. Or maybe you don't
want to use itunes to restore a broken ipod.
There's really no choice. It vaguely reminds me of those Caribbean and Mexican beach
resort vacations. As long as you stay on the property in the enclosed fence, everything
is fine. Ignore the guys with machine guns outside. Just do as we tell you and no one
will get hurt. :)
Floomla is a decent free ipod app, btw.
BTW: Microsoft offers a number of free versions of Visual Studio. Depending on the
language, etc, Eclipse is a good free alternative too.
Keith
10:26 a.m.
New subject: OT hardware flexibility and reliability, was Re: Museums
On Jan 25, 2010, at 1:40 AM, Keith M wrote:
Hi Dave,
SO you admit the elitist attitude and price part? :)
Elitist attitude: I prefer to refer to it as "having standards".
It's the same thing that causes me to avoid eating at McDonald's and
shopping at Wal*Mart.
But I have something to back it up. I've owned my primary desktop
machine for four years; I bought it used for $1K. In that time, it
has never crashed, never gotten a virus, and never had a hardware
failure. I am what most people would call an "uber power user"...At
any one time I've got probably fifty shell windows open, and maybe
twenty browser windows with upwards of a hundred tabs each, and
probably half a dozen PDF files, running across eight virtual
screens. Add to that a mail program, and probably half a dozen other
things. Oh, and at least two simh simulators, and three instances of
Hercules.
I work at home. I use this machine all day, every day, not just
"a few hours after dinner to surf porn and eBay" like most
people...but I use it ALL DAY, part of the time for work stuff, part
for personal, but on any average day I'm pounding the crap out of
this machine for probably fifteen hours.
It has never crashed. Never had a virus. Never had a hardware
failure. Never rebooted unless it was intentional. I've never
replaced anything due to breakage or wearing out except a keyboard,
and only because I wanted one. And oh by the way, that wasn't an
Apple keyboard. (though my new one is)
As for pricing, you get what you pay for...but do you really think
$1000 for a machine of this level of reliability and longevity, over
that many years, is bad economics?
--
Dave McGuire
Port Charlotte, FL
But there's just something about Apple that I just
can't stand.
I'm not sure if it's the elitist attitude, or the prices, or the
forced-lock-ins.
What lock-ins would those be, specifically? My main desktop
machine is (right now) a Mac, because it is (right now) the best
way to get a very fast UNIX machine on a desktop. I suffer no
lock-ins of any kind. For as long as I've been on the internet, you
think I would have
learned by now to avoid posting flame-bait like that.
Probably. ;) But I'd not dismiss it as such. I'll simply explain
my point and move on. You're laboring under some false assumptions,
which I will clarify.
There are tons of ipod/itunes and iphone issues abound
(see ongoing
Sherman Antitrust Act lawsuits, like slattery vs apple. This suit
has been renamed, and I'm too lazy to find it). If you've ever own
an ipod, you know exactly what the problem is. You must use itunes
to manage your ipod, and it only manages your ipod. Want to just
load mp3s onto your ipod without itunes? You can't do it (w/o
running 3rd party unsupported software that risks damaging the
stability of your ipod). Every other mp3 player sold(OK, I'm
probably pushing my luck here) supports simply copying the .mp3s
directly onto the player. Proprietary .AAC extensions, DRM issues,
problems w/ corrupted ipods and getting music that you paid for off
it. Moving/switching/upgrading ipods. Apple charging for removing
drm, etc.
I don't own an iPod or an iPhone. It's trivial to put mp3 files
on an iPod, though; I've done that lots of times. The suitly DRM
garbage is easy to avoid. I've never been bitten by it, and never
will be. You don't have to be either.
I was mainly talking about the hardware<---->OS
locks. According
to the license agreement for OSX, you must install OSX on Apple
Hardware.
No problem there...not that I pay much attention to licenses.
If your apple hardware breaks, you have to buy more,
expensive,
apple hardware to replace it. You are forced to buy their hardware
to upgrade.
Well, it rarely breaks in the first place, but since you mentioned
it...Stuff is cheap and available. Neither my video card, my DIMMs,
my GigE interface, my FibreChannel controller, nor my hard drives say
Apple anywhere on them.
Completely different situation with Windows, Linux,
and so on. You
can use any available (compatible) hardware, and if my dell breaks,
...which it will... (sorry)
I buy a new Dell, Gateway, Sony, etc etc etc.
...and if my G5 breaks, which it hasn't (and remember, it was a
few years old when I bought it!) I can just pick up some parts via
eBay. Problem solved.
I don't know about video cards, etc, but the pure
number of
hardware options available for Windows/Linux users simply kills any
mac offering.
Really? How many different video cards do you have in your
computer right now? Mine works great, I have no complaints and I'm
missing no functionality. There's probably a newer one out there,
but do I care? Not particularly.
I will admit, though, that I do enjoy the hardware flexibility
that exists in the Linux world. I set up lots of Linux machines for
people who finally figure out the Windows scam and jump ship. I
don't push them toward Macs because everyone around here (southwest
Florida) is broke, and I can give them Linux machines for free. I
drive around on trash day and pick up PCs that are too slow to run
Windows (typically 1GHz-2GHz machines) or have bad power supplies
(lots of lightning down here), etc, and load them up with Linux for
people. I like the hardware flexibility there, because I can
scrounge anything out of the junk box and it'll work.
But for my machines? I depend on them for my livelihood. I want
the best of everything, and I don't like to settle for less.
Isn't simply having much more choice about what
hardware to use
better than being given a smaller group to choose from?
http://www.pcworld.com/article/181200/
bad_apple_five_classic_apple_marketing_tactics_that_lock_you_in.html
Has this stuff changed recently?
I have no idea (haven't read the article), I generally don't
listen to what the media wants to tell me, I just use my computers.
I have no doubt that Apple employs a bunch of sleazy suits who
will do whatever they can to make money, no matter how dishonest, and
those suits need to be beaten to within an inch of their lives. But
that doesn't change the fact that:
This computer has been in daily, VERY hard use at about 15hrs/day
seven days per week and has never crashed, never had a virus, never
had a hardware failure...never so much as burped. Ever.
This isn't "religion", nor is it a "flame"...It's a fact.
I
looked at the stuff that was available, and made my decision. And
I'm not "an Apple guy": I use a Mac because, right now, it's the best
way to get a very fast, very reliable graphical UNIX machine on the
desktop. The moment that changes, I will move to a different
platform. If the PC world or Microsoft had anything better to offer,
I'd use it. The moment Microsoft comes out with a good, fast, solid,
standards-based desktop UNIX implementation, I'll use it!
-Dave
5177
days inactive
5213
days old
83 comments
30 participants
participants (30)
-
aek＠bitsavers.org -
als＠thangorodrim.de -
bfranchuk＠jetnet.ab.ca -
brianlanning＠gmail.com -
cclist＠sydex.com -
christian_liendo＠yahoo.com -
derschjo＠mail.msu.edu -
doc＠vaxen.net -
ethan.dicks＠gmail.com -
evan＠snarc.net -
geneb＠deltasoft.com -
geoffr＠zipcon.net -
IanK＠vulcan.com -
jdr_use＠bluewin.ch -
js＠cimmeri.com -
keithvz＠verizon.net -
lance.w.lyon＠gmail.com -
legalize＠xmission.com -
madodel＠ptdprolog.net -
mcguire＠neurotica.com -
oltmansg＠bellsouth.net -
pat＠computer-refuge.org -
ray＠arachelian.com -
rodsmallwood＠btconnect.com -
rws＠ripco.com -
spectre＠floodgap.com -
teoz＠neo.rr.com -
thypope＠gmail.com -
trixter＠oldskool.org -
wdonzelli＠gmail.com