On Tue, 27 Jan 2009 14:01:08 -1000, dsi1 wrote:

> Dan Abel wrote:
>> In article > ,
>> dsi1 > wrote:
>>
>>
>>> It's pretty confusing stuff. My guess is that Intel was unable to
>>> register the X386 and X86 designations as trademarks allowing AMD to
>>> rip-off the numbers. I do remember that the first Intel
>>> microprocessors were the 8008 and the 8088.
>>
>> Time for a new memory?
>>
>> From:
>>
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_4004
>>
>>
>> The Intel 4004 is a 4-bit central processing unit (CPU) released by
>> Intel Corporation in 1971. The 4004 is the first complete CPU on one
>> chip, the first commercially available microprocessor
>>
>>
> Thanks for that info. I can't say that I've ever heard of the 4004 - at
> least it was never mentioned in my electronic classes. I guess there's a
> 1001 somewhere out there...

Yes, in fact. Though never commercialized.

--
Groet, salut, Wim.

On Tue, 27 Jan 2009 16:44:12 +0200, ChattyCathy
> wrote:

>Never owned a Mac myself. Used a couple at work years ago - as they
>were the 'in-thing' for doing DTP back then and I was fairly impressed,
>but there was no way I could afford to buy one myself (remember they're
>imports to us).

Not to worry. Nothing Apple/Mac is inexpensive. YES! They are
*expensive* for everyone.... maybe more expensive for you, but not
considered cheap for anyone over here. The way it goes locally is
either you're a rabid follower or your place of employment pays for
it.
>
>Had my fair share of Windoze machines, but moved over to Linux (as a
>desktop OS) a year or so ago. I find it perfectly adequate for my needs
>(and of course it's free). However, IMHO, Windoze 7 will probably get
>most of the desktop and the netbook markets, as M$ seems to be trying
>to learn from their past mistakes OS-wise and might have much more
>reasonable license fees from what I've heard (so far)...

So, Windows "OS 7" looks like a winner? Personally, I'd rather skip
Vista - but that's my MO. I don't use every Windows OS just because
it's there.



--
I never worry about diets. The only carrots that
interest me are the number of carats in a diamond.

Mae West

On Mon, 26 Jan 2009 22:48:21 -0600, phaeton >
wrote:

>"x86" is slang for the instruction set of the Intel "8086" family of
>processors (and clones), which modern PC processors have decended from
>(80286, 80386, 80486, 80586, 80686, etc). So when someone says "way
>back in the day on my 486!" they're talking about the 80486 processor.

Oh, OK... I've heard of 486. I think our first computer was a 286.
It didn't have a hard drive, but cost something like $2400 (from an
independent vendor), so we saved money. It had two huge floppy disks.
One was the software and other one was storage.


--
I never worry about diets. The only carrots that
interest me are the number of carats in a diamond.

Mae West

"sf" > wrote in message
...
> On Mon, 26 Jan 2009 22:48:21 -0600, phaeton >
> wrote:
>
>>"x86" is slang for the instruction set of the Intel "8086" family of
>>processors (and clones), which modern PC processors have decended from
>>(80286, 80386, 80486, 80586, 80686, etc). So when someone says "way
>>back in the day on my 486!" they're talking about the 80486 processor.
>
> Oh, OK... I've heard of 486. I think our first computer was a 286.
> It didn't have a hard drive, but cost something like $2400 (from an
> independent vendor), so we saved money. It had two huge floppy disks.
> One was the software and other one was storage.

After the 486 they decided to change the naming and started with the Pentium
series. The Pentium 100 cost about $100 more than the Pentium 90, but the
specs +/- were amazingly close. Smart people bought the 90 those that had
to have the best bought the 100..

On Tue 27 Jan 2009 10:58:34p, sf told us...

> On Tue, 27 Jan 2009 16:44:12 +0200, ChattyCathy
> > wrote:
>
>>Never owned a Mac myself. Used a couple at work years ago - as they
>>were the 'in-thing' for doing DTP back then and I was fairly impressed,
>>but there was no way I could afford to buy one myself (remember they're
>>imports to us).
>
> Not to worry. Nothing Apple/Mac is inexpensive. YES! They are
> *expensive* for everyone.... maybe more expensive for you, but not
> considered cheap for anyone over here. The way it goes locally is
> either you're a rabid follower or your place of employment pays for
> it.
>>
>>Had my fair share of Windoze machines, but moved over to Linux (as a
>>desktop OS) a year or so ago. I find it perfectly adequate for my needs
>>(and of course it's free). However, IMHO, Windoze 7 will probably get
>>most of the desktop and the netbook markets, as M$ seems to be trying
>>to learn from their past mistakes OS-wise and might have much more
>>reasonable license fees from what I've heard (so far)...
>
> So, Windows "OS 7" looks like a winner? Personally, I'd rather skip
> Vista - but that's my MO. I don't use every Windows OS just because
> it's there.

I've stuck with Windows XP Pro SP3, which is what we run on our PCs at
work, along with Server 2003. We had the beta of Vista and no one wanted
to touch it, so never gave it serious thought, either personally or at
work. The few that did try Vista at home really hated it. We now have the
beta of Windows 7 and it does look promising. Most likely we will go with
that at work and I'll install it at home later this year.

--
Wayne Boatwright
e-mail to wayneboatwright at gmail dot com
************************************************** **********************
Date: Monday, 01(I)/26(XXVI)/09(MMIX)
************************************************** **********************
************************************************** **********************
And I thought phrenology with a ball-peen hammer was a dying art!
************************************************** **********************

On Wed, 28 Jan 2009 12:17:03 GMT, Wayne Boatwright
> wrote:

> We now have the
>beta of Windows 7 and it does look promising. Most likely we will go with
>that at work and I'll install it at home later this year.

So when do you think it will be the dell standard OS - or are they
will go all the way with Linux?


--
I never worry about diets. The only carrots that
interest me are the number of carats in a diamond.

Mae West

On 2009-01-28, sf > wrote:

> So when do you think it will be the dell standard OS - or are they
> will go all the way with Linux?

No. Linux will not displace Microsoft at Dell or in the US, although, for
the first time, M$'s market share has dropped below 90%. OMG! Most of that
is Apple. Most of Linux's incursion is the rest of the World and servers.
You can count on Dell pushing Windows 7 as soon as possible, as Vista is a
now the pariah of OSs, whether it really deserves that rep or not.

I think it does, but not for the reasons most people would think. I also
think Window 7 will be no better for the same reasons I consider Vista a bad
OS, but that's another thread.

You will see greater adoption of Linux in some areas. Virtually all the
micro-laptops are Linux based, as their smaller cpu/memory-based hardware is
only practical with a more efficient OS. Super pig Windows just won't work
on these less than mega/giga hardware machines.

http://tinyurl.com/b5nm9u

nb

sf wrote:

> So, Windows "OS 7" looks like a winner?

I wouldn't use the word 'winner'... but it looks somewhat hopeful.

> Personally, I'd rather skip
> Vista - but that's my MO. I don't use every Windows OS just because
> it's there.

Yep, I also believe in the old saying, 'If it ain't broke, don't fix
it.'

However, as I am sure somebody has already pointed out, once Win 7 is
officially launched - and a huge percentage of the population on this
planet have installed it on their PCs, security patch support for
XP/Vista will (eventually) be dropped... When that happens, those who
haven't upgraded will have to do so, or leave their PCs open to malware
etc.

Anyway, every time M$ launches a new version of their OS I always
remember this little episode:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TGLhuF3L48U

Never fails to make me chuckle ;-)
--
Cheers
Chatty Cathy - Moving right along...

On 2009-01-28, ChattyCathy > wrote:

> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TGLhuF3L48U
>
> Never fails to make me chuckle ;-)

Never fails to occur!

Even XP is not immune. I apparently did something right on my mom's XP
machine (besides loading Slackware Linux and relegating XP to the dustbin)
cuz it quit crashing to BSOD every 2-3 hrs. I have to admit, XP is pretty
stable for Windows. but it takes forever to get fully loaded and I still run
across websites showing the BSOD on kiosks, terminal schedule screens, etc.
I still don't trust it for doing online banking, business, etc.


nb

notbob wrote:

> On 2009-01-28, sf > wrote:
>
> > So when do you think it will be the dell standard OS - or are they
> > will go all the way with Linux?
>
> No. Linux will not displace Microsoft at Dell or in the US,
> although, for the first time, M$'s market share has dropped below
> 90%. OMG! Most of that is Apple. Most of Linux's incursion is the
> rest of the World and servers.

There was an essay by author Neal Stephenson about the OS situation
around ten years ago, called "In the Beginning was the Command Line".

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neal_Stephenson/In_the_Beginning>

It has some interesting insights. One of the ones discussed, BeOS, is
pretty much out of the picture these days.



Brian

--
If televison's a babysitter, the Internet is a drunk librarian who
won't shut up.
-- Dorothy Gambrell (http://catandgirl.com)

On 2009-01-28, Default User > wrote:

> It has some interesting insights.

Only if one is impressed by psuedo-intellectuals. His analogies were bogus,
just like that stupid art/zen/motorcycles book.

> One of the ones discussed, BeOS, is
> pretty much out of the picture these days.

As are half a dozen other OSs that were superior to Windows.

Microsoft triumphed cuz middle management is populated by morons. Linux
will overcome cuz IT is a technical arena. It'll be an uphill battle for
the geeks to overcome the twits, but it will happen. Economics and basic
know-how will out. What's really funny is unix already ruled the roost when
M$ invaded the corporate landscape. Now, it's coming full circle and M$
WILL lose.

nb

On Wed 28 Jan 2009 09:22:01a, sf told us...

> On Wed, 28 Jan 2009 12:17:03 GMT, Wayne Boatwright
> > wrote:
>
>> We now have the
>>beta of Windows 7 and it does look promising. Most likely we will go
with
>>that at work and I'll install it at home later this year.
>
> So when do you think it will be the dell standard OS - or are they
> will go all the way with Linux?
>
>

I have no idea about Dell. Never owned one, and don't know their history.

The scenario in general is a little different this time, IMO. They brought
out retail versions of Vista while XP Pro was a very stable OS. I doubt
Vista will ever be stable or desirable. When the retail version of Windows
7 is issued, I would imagine that most will go with that since Vista has
been so dismal.

--
Wayne Boatwright
e-mail to wayneboatwright at gmail dot com
************************************************** **********************
Date: Monday, 01(I)/26(XXVI)/09(MMIX)
************************************************** **********************
************************************************** **********************
And I thought phrenology with a ball-peen hammer was a dying art!
************************************************** **********************

Wayne Boatwright wrote:

> I have no idea about Dell. Never owned one, and don't know their history.
>
> The scenario in general is a little different this time, IMO. They brought
> out retail versions of Vista while XP Pro was a very stable OS. I doubt
> Vista will ever be stable or desirable. When the retail version of Windows
> 7 is issued, I would imagine that most will go with that since Vista has
> been so dismal.
>

I have no idea why folks would call it unstable. Of course when Vista
was first released, there was a lot of trouble with sorting out driver
issues i.e., a lot of programs would not work, but there's nothing too
unusual about that. The current release works great if you have the
hardware. This too, is not unusual, the hardware has always had to be
sufficient to meet the requirements of the OS for proper operation.

The main problem is that the OS was unsuitable for many cheap economy
machines. Ha ha, big mistake on MS's part. OTOH, Vista works fine on my
crappy laptops - I just needed to tweak it a bit by removing features -
just like Win7. :-)

What is unusual is all the love displayed for an OS in beta release. Why
is that? Most pre-release programs are approached with caution and some
reservations - as they should be.

It looks like Windows 7 could be a hit due to this pent-up demand for a
new Windows OS. However, what would happen if Win7 was a flop? My guess
is that it would be the end of the world. :-)

Vista has a lot going for it, I think. It's stable in the machines I've
used, feature-rich and you can use all those cool Aero effects if you've
got the machine that's up to the task. What's not desirable about that?
The reality is that Vista is working just fine for us and changing over
to Win 7 seems like a nutty idea - a step backwards instead of forwards.

On Wed, 28 Jan 2009 16:29:38 -1000, dsi1 > wrote:

>The main problem is that the OS was unsuitable for many cheap economy
>machines. Ha ha, big mistake on MS's part. OTOH, Vista works fine on my
>crappy laptops - I just needed to tweak it a bit by removing features -
>just like Win7. :-)

Features? I'm not one to fiddle with an OS.... I think. I know I
fiddle with the software it runs.
>
>What is unusual is all the love displayed for an OS in beta release. Why
>is that? Most pre-release programs are approached with caution and some
>reservations - as they should be.
>
>It looks like Windows 7 could be a hit due to this pent-up demand for a
>new Windows OS. However, what would happen if Win7 was a flop? My guess
>is that it would be the end of the world. :-)

Index fingers held up as if holding off a vampire (picture a biblical
cross).
>
>Vista has a lot going for it, I think. It's stable in the machines I've
>used, feature-rich and you can use all those cool Aero effects if you've
>got the machine that's up to the task. What's not desirable about that?
>The reality is that Vista is working just fine for us and changing over
>to Win 7 seems like a nutty idea - a step backwards instead of forwards.

I've decided that you're rational and knowledgeable. You need to stop
immediately. Just kidding!

Who are you and where did you come from? You're a breath of fresh air
among all those stinky PL stalkers.


--
I never worry about diets. The only carrots that
interest me are the number of carats in a diamond.

Mae West

On Wed, 28 Jan 2009 20:24:00 +0200, ChattyCathy
> wrote:

>sf wrote:
>
>> So, Windows "OS 7" looks like a winner?
>
>I wouldn't use the word 'winner'... but it looks somewhat hopeful.
>
>> Personally, I'd rather skip
>> Vista - but that's my MO. I don't use every Windows OS just because
>> it's there.
>
>Yep, I also believe in the old saying, 'If it ain't broke, don't fix
>it.'
>
>However, as I am sure somebody has already pointed out, once Win 7 is
>officially launched - and a huge percentage of the population on this
>planet have installed it on their PCs, security patch support for
>XP/Vista will (eventually) be dropped... When that happens, those who
>haven't upgraded will have to do so, or leave their PCs open to malware
>etc.
>
>Anyway, every time M$ launches a new version of their OS I always
>remember this little episode:
>
>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TGLhuF3L48U
>
>Never fails to make me chuckle ;-)

I'm one of those people who doesn't buy anything (computer related)
new until it's old and ready to be replaced. For instance, I bought
my current news reader with full knowledge they were releasing a new
product the following month.


--
I never worry about diets. The only carrots that
interest me are the number of carats in a diamond.

Mae West

On Wed, 28 Jan 2009 19:53:33 GMT, notbob > wrote:

>On 2009-01-28, ChattyCathy > wrote:
>
>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TGLhuF3L48U
>>
>> Never fails to make me chuckle ;-)
>
>Never fails to occur!
>
>Even XP is not immune. I apparently did something right on my mom's XP
>machine (besides loading Slackware Linux and relegating XP to the dustbin)
>cuz it quit crashing to BSOD every 2-3 hrs.
>
I still remember when XP was looked on as a shaky system. It's ok,
but I still prefer 3x.

>I have to admit, XP is pretty stable for Windows. but it takes forever to get fully loaded

Keeeriest! Look at your startup menu, son. After that, I guess you
need to use Tweak UI because there's a timing to the other boot up
stuff that you can reduce significantly if it's a problem. I don't
have an issue with my computer boot up. I certainly don't need to
leave to make a cup of coffee while it boots up.

Tweak UI - This PowerToy gives you access to system settings that are
not exposed in the Windows XP default user interface, including mouse
settings, Explorer settings, taskbar settings, and more.

Version 2.10 requires Windows XP Service Pack 1 or Windows Server
2003.

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/D...powertoys.mspx


>and I still run
>across websites showing the BSOD on kiosks, terminal schedule screens, etc.

I have no idea what you're talking about.

>I still don't trust it for doing online banking, business, etc.

For that matter, why trust banks in general? I remember many news
stories of some random bank employee's computer loaded with customer
account and social security numbers being stolen. It's a big, bad,
scary world out there.


--
I never worry about diets. The only carrots that
interest me are the number of carats in a diamond.

Mae West

On Tue, 27 Jan 2009 22:59:07 GMT, notbob > wrote:

> Linux WILL KILL Microsoft, of that I have no doubt.

Here's my opinion: A free platform will be cutting edge no longer
than the time they have "pay" competition. At the point the
competition goes under, they will charge - and then Linux (aka
LinSucks) will have another free OS nipping at their heels.



--
I never worry about diets. The only carrots that
interest me are the number of carats in a diamond.

Mae West

On Tue, 27 Jan 2009 13:53:30 -1000, dsi1 > wrote:

>I'm not as confident as you are about the demise
>of MS but it sure would be great...

I heard/read that MS has read the writing on the wall and would
produce OS's for home use and business that were very different,
unlike the Pro vs. Home versions of today. Don't ask me what they
would look like, I have no idea.


--
I never worry about diets. The only carrots that
interest me are the number of carats in a diamond.

Mae West

sf wrote:
> On Wed, 28 Jan 2009 16:29:38 -1000, dsi1 > wrote:
>
>> The main problem is that the OS was unsuitable for many cheap economy
>> machines. Ha ha, big mistake on MS's part. OTOH, Vista works fine on my
>> crappy laptops - I just needed to tweak it a bit by removing features -
>> just like Win7. :-)
>
> Features? I'm not one to fiddle with an OS.... I think. I know I
> fiddle with the software it runs.
>> What is unusual is all the love displayed for an OS in beta release. Why
>> is that? Most pre-release programs are approached with caution and some
>> reservations - as they should be.
>>
>> It looks like Windows 7 could be a hit due to this pent-up demand for a
>> new Windows OS. However, what would happen if Win7 was a flop? My guess
>> is that it would be the end of the world. :-)
>
> Index fingers held up as if holding off a vampire (picture a biblical
> cross).
>> Vista has a lot going for it, I think. It's stable in the machines I've
>> used, feature-rich and you can use all those cool Aero effects if you've
>> got the machine that's up to the task. What's not desirable about that?
>> The reality is that Vista is working just fine for us and changing over
>> to Win 7 seems like a nutty idea - a step backwards instead of forwards.
>
> I've decided that you're rational and knowledgeable. You need to stop
> immediately. Just kidding!
>
> Who are you and where did you come from? You're a breath of fresh air
> among all those stinky PL stalkers.

It's good to be thought of as fresh meat, err... air. :-) There's
nothing much to say about myself and since this is the internet you
shouldn't believe most things a person says about themselves anyway.

The dynamics of this group is a bit intense and quite nutty. I'm not
going to be able to take part in the trolling, hassling, and boasting of
the size of one's killfile and the general mayhem that goes on here but
that's pretty much the bread and butter of Usenet. This group just does
it a little better than most, I guess. :-) I would have thought a forum
devoted to food would be friendlier - big mistake.

OTOH, I got a 100 year old recipe for chocolate cake here - that's
something I'd sure like to try - and will. :-)

>
>

On 2009-01-29, sf > wrote:

> have an issue with my computer boot up. I certainly don't need to
> leave to make a cup of coffee while it boots up.

Well, since I installed Linux, it's a non-issue. Linux is infinitely
tweakable without having to download more software. Thnx for the tip, just
the same.


>>and I still run
>>across websites showing the BSOD on kiosks, terminal schedule screens, etc.
>
> I have no idea what you're talking about.


Blue Screen of Death, Window's notorious crash msg screen:

http://tinyurl.com/b4oaf4

> For that matter, why trust banks in general? I remember many news
> stories of some random bank employee's computer loaded with customer
> account and social security numbers being stolen. It's a big, bad,
> scary world out there.

Most of those problems can be traced back to M$ systems. Ask any security
expert which OS is the biggest security risk. Windows, hands down.

nb

"Wayne Boatwright" > wrote in message
5.250...
> On Wed 28 Jan 2009 09:22:01a, sf told us...
>
>> On Wed, 28 Jan 2009 12:17:03 GMT, Wayne Boatwright
>> > wrote:
>>
>>> We now have the
>>>beta of Windows 7 and it does look promising. Most likely we will go
> with
>>>that at work and I'll install it at home later this year.
>>
>> So when do you think it will be the dell standard OS - or are they
>> will go all the way with Linux?
>>
>>
>
> I have no idea about Dell. Never owned one, and don't know their history.
>
> The scenario in general is a little different this time, IMO. They
> brought
> out retail versions of Vista while XP Pro was a very stable OS. I doubt
> Vista will ever be stable or desirable. When the retail version of
> Windows
> 7 is issued, I would imagine that most will go with that since Vista has
> been so dismal.
>
> --
> Wayne Boatwright
> e-mail to wayneboatwright at gmail dot com
> ************************************************** **********************
> Date: Monday, 01(I)/26(XXVI)/09(MMIX)
> ************************************************** **********************
> ************************************************** **********************
> And I thought phrenology with a ball-peen hammer was a dying art!
> ************************************************** **********************
>
>
>

shows how little you know about vista. first, if you like vista, you'll like
7. if you like xp, you'll hate 7. period.

--
C.D

On Thu, 29 Jan 2009 10:11:24 GMT, notbob > wrote:

>Blue Screen of Death, Window's notorious crash msg screen:
>
>http://tinyurl.com/b4oaf4

My only retort is that if you get that blue screen of death and your
hard drive isn't dead, you've been screwing around with something you
know nothing about and did it to yourself, the OS didn't just up and
decide it was going to have a bad day.


--
I never worry about diets. The only carrots that
interest me are the number of carats in a diamond.

Mae West

sf wrote:

> On Thu, 29 Jan 2009 10:11:24 GMT, notbob > wrote:
>
>>Blue Screen of Death, Window's notorious crash msg screen:
>>
>>http://tinyurl.com/b4oaf4
>
> My only retort is that if you get that blue screen of death and your
> hard drive isn't dead, you've been screwing around with something you
> know nothing about and did it to yourself, the OS didn't just up and
> decide it was going to have a bad day.
>

<ROFL>

So you think that Mr. Gates and that other guy (sorry don't know his
name) were 'screwing around with something they they knew nothing
about' when it happened to them at the Win '98 launch?
--
Cheers
Chatty Cathy - still laughing...

On 2009-01-29, sf > wrote:

> My only retort is that if you get that blue screen of death and your
> hard drive isn't dead, you've been screwing around with something you
> know nothing about and did it to yourself, the OS didn't just up and
> decide it was going to have a bad day.

Apparently, you missed the CNN video showing W98 BSoDing with Bill Gates
feigning surprise. If Bill and his minions can't prevent it, what chance do
the hoi polloi have.

I and my cow orkers had to put up with the ol BSoD half a dozen times a day,
this with half a dozen IT support people and 3 hardware techs not 100 feet
away. The standard IT support hotline response was, "Have you tried
rebooting it?". We stopped bothering to call.

Nevermind. I keep forgetting you M$ disciples live on a river in Egypt.

nb

On Thu, 29 Jan 2009 01:27:48 GMT, Wayne Boatwright wrote:

> On Wed 28 Jan 2009 09:22:01a, sf told us...
>
>> On Wed, 28 Jan 2009 12:17:03 GMT, Wayne Boatwright
>> > wrote:
>>
>>> We now have the
>>>beta of Windows 7 and it does look promising. Most likely we will go
> with
>>>that at work and I'll install it at home later this year.
>>
>> So when do you think it will be the dell standard OS - or are they
>> will go all the way with Linux?
>>
>
> I have no idea about Dell. Never owned one, and don't know their history.
>
> The scenario in general is a little different this time, IMO. They brought
> out retail versions of Vista while XP Pro was a very stable OS. I doubt
> Vista will ever be stable or desirable. When the retail version of Windows
> 7 is issued, I would imagine that most will go with that since Vista has
> been so dismal.

i was apprehensive about vista when i bought my new machine. however,
since the machine seems to have the muscle required, i've had zero problems
with it. but my applications are pretty white-bread.

as for upgrading to it from another machine, i guess the question i would
ask is 'why?'

your pal,
blake

In article >,
sf > wrote:

> On Thu, 29 Jan 2009 10:11:24 GMT, notbob > wrote:
>
> >Blue Screen of Death, Window's notorious crash msg screen:
> >
> >http://tinyurl.com/b4oaf4
>
> My only retort is that if you get that blue screen of death and your
> hard drive isn't dead, you've been screwing around with something you
> know nothing about and did it to yourself, the OS didn't just up and
> decide it was going to have a bad day.

I have it from a reliable source (the little voices in my head) that one
of the BSOD crashes mentioned by nb:

http://digilander.libero.it/torshind/bsod/mcd_bsod.jpg

was caused by the customer in the McDonalds drive-through trying to
order beetroot on his hamburger. Obviously, the Windows OS was never
designed to handle something like that!

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA

On Thu 29 Jan 2009 05:48:44a, C.D told us...

>
> "Wayne Boatwright" > wrote in message
> 5.250...
>> On Wed 28 Jan 2009 09:22:01a, sf told us...
>>
>>> On Wed, 28 Jan 2009 12:17:03 GMT, Wayne Boatwright
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>> We now have the
>>>>beta of Windows 7 and it does look promising. Most likely we will go
>> with
>>>>that at work and I'll install it at home later this year.
>>>
>>> So when do you think it will be the dell standard OS - or are they
>>> will go all the way with Linux?
>>>
>>>
>>
>> I have no idea about Dell. Never owned one, and don't know their
>> history.
>>
>> The scenario in general is a little different this time, IMO. They
>> brought
>> out retail versions of Vista while XP Pro was a very stable OS. I
>> doubt Vista will ever be stable or desirable. When the retail version
>> of Windows
>> 7 is issued, I would imagine that most will go with that since Vista
>> has been so dismal.
>>

>
> shows how little you know about vista. first, if you like vista, you'll
> like 7. if you like xp, you'll hate 7. period.
>

Quick to judge aren't you? Shows how little youknow about me. I've tried
both Vista and 7. IMO, Vista is a loser. The 7 beta is a step ahead.

--
Wayne Boatwright
e-mail to wayneboatwright at gmail dot com
************************************************** **********************
Date: Thursday, 01(I)/29(XXIX)/09(MMIX)
************************************************** **********************
************************************************** **********************
One thing about pain: It proves you're alive.
************************************************** **********************

Wayne Boatwright wrote:

> On Thu 29 Jan 2009 05:48:44a, C.D told us...
>
> >
> > "Wayne Boatwright" > wrote in message
> > 5.250...
> >> On Wed 28 Jan 2009 09:22:01a, sf told us...
> >>
> >>> On Wed, 28 Jan 2009 12:17:03 GMT, Wayne Boatwright
> >>> > wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> We now have the
> >>>>beta of Windows 7 and it does look promising. Most likely we will go
> >> with
> >>>>that at work and I'll install it at home later this year.
> >>>
> >>> So when do you think it will be the dell standard OS - or are they
> >>> will go all the way with Linux?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >> I have no idea about Dell. Never owned one, and don't know their
> >> history.
> >>
> >> The scenario in general is a little different this time, IMO. They
> >> brought
> >> out retail versions of Vista while XP Pro was a very stable OS. I
> >> doubt Vista will ever be stable or desirable. When the retail version
> >> of Windows
> >> 7 is issued, I would imagine that most will go with that since Vista
> >> has been so dismal.
> >>
>
> >
> > shows how little you know about vista. first, if you like vista, you'll
> > like 7. if you like xp, you'll hate 7. period.
> >
>
> Quick to judge aren't you? Shows how little youknow about me. I've tried
> both Vista and 7. IMO, Vista is a loser. The 7 beta is a step ahead.


And "C.D." is "a step ahead" of a "loser" like you, Li'l Wayne...


--
Best
Greg

On Thu, 29 Jan 2009 18:26:10 +0200, ChattyCathy
> wrote:

>sf wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 29 Jan 2009 10:11:24 GMT, notbob > wrote:
>>
>>>Blue Screen of Death, Window's notorious crash msg screen:
>>>
>>>http://tinyurl.com/b4oaf4
>>
>> My only retort is that if you get that blue screen of death and your
>> hard drive isn't dead, you've been screwing around with something you
>> know nothing about and did it to yourself, the OS didn't just up and
>> decide it was going to have a bad day.
>>
>
><ROFL>
>
>So you think that Mr. Gates and that other guy (sorry don't know his
>name) were 'screwing around with something they they knew nothing
>about' when it happened to them at the Win '98 launch?

The problem could have been caused by the software. I never - ever
had a problem until my Win98 Hard Drive up and died on me, which was
no fault of the OS.


--
I never worry about diets. The only carrots that
interest me are the number of carats in a diamond.

Mae West

On Thu, 29 Jan 2009 16:50:01 GMT, notbob > wrote:

>Nevermind. I keep forgetting you M$ disciples live on a river in Egypt.

We also don't have Microsoft OS problems like you supposed gurus of
computerland have.


--
I never worry about diets. The only carrots that
interest me are the number of carats in a diamond.

Mae West

On Thu, 29 Jan 2009 11:09:07 -0800, Dan Abel > wrote:

>In article >,
> sf > wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 29 Jan 2009 10:11:24 GMT, notbob > wrote:
>>
>> >Blue Screen of Death, Window's notorious crash msg screen:
>> >
>> >http://tinyurl.com/b4oaf4
>>
>> My only retort is that if you get that blue screen of death and your
>> hard drive isn't dead, you've been screwing around with something you
>> know nothing about and did it to yourself, the OS didn't just up and
>> decide it was going to have a bad day.
>
>I have it from a reliable source (the little voices in my head) that one
>of the BSOD crashes mentioned by nb:
>
>http://digilander.libero.it/torshind/bsod/mcd_bsod.jpg
>
>was caused by the customer in the McDonalds drive-through trying to
>order beetroot on his hamburger. Obviously, the Windows OS was never
>designed to handle something like that!


Thanks for the insider information!

The McDonald's drive in order screen isn't something I work with on an
everyday basis, but IMO what you posted was a case in point that
software causes the problem.


--
I never worry about diets. The only carrots that
interest me are the number of carats in a diamond.

Mae West

sf wrote:

> On Thu, 29 Jan 2009 18:26:10 +0200, ChattyCathy
> > wrote:
>
>>sf wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, 29 Jan 2009 10:11:24 GMT, notbob > wrote:
>>>
>>>>Blue Screen of Death, Window's notorious crash msg screen:
>>>>
>>>>http://tinyurl.com/b4oaf4
>>>
>>> My only retort is that if you get that blue screen of death and your
>>> hard drive isn't dead, you've been screwing around with something
>>> you know nothing about and did it to yourself, the OS didn't just up
>>> and decide it was going to have a bad day.
>>>
>>
>><ROFL>
>>
>>So you think that Mr. Gates and that other guy (sorry don't know his
>>name) were 'screwing around with something they they knew nothing
>>about' when it happened to them at the Win '98 launch?
>
> The problem could have been caused by the software. I never - ever
> had a problem until my Win98 Hard Drive up and died on me, which was
> no fault of the OS.
>
>
IIRC, one of the major 'selling points' for Win 98 was the fact that it
was supposed to be able to do the "Plug and Play" thing. IOW, M$
sourced and supplied the drivers required for a wide range of hardware
(available back then) which they bundled into the OS - which in turn,
were supposed to install automatically if and when the user plugged any
new hardware in. The idea being that it was supposed to save the user
from having to hunt around for and/or load the drivers required for
various hardware themselves - in theory. However, that video shows that
when M$ tried to do that very thing with their very own OS they got the
BSoD. Hence the term "Plug and Pray"...

--
Cheers
Chatty Cathy

On 2009-01-30, sf > wrote:
> On Thu, 29 Jan 2009 16:50:01 GMT, notbob > wrote:
>
>>Nevermind. I keep forgetting you M$ disciples live on a river in Egypt.
>
> We also don't have Microsoft OS problems like you supposed gurus of
> computerland have.

Of course you don't.

In article >,
sf > wrote:

> On Thu, 29 Jan 2009 11:09:07 -0800, Dan Abel > wrote:
>
> >In article >,
> > sf > wrote:
> >
> >> On Thu, 29 Jan 2009 10:11:24 GMT, notbob > wrote:
> >>
> >> >Blue Screen of Death, Window's notorious crash msg screen:
> >> >
> >> >http://tinyurl.com/b4oaf4
> >>
> >> My only retort is that if you get that blue screen of death and your
> >> hard drive isn't dead, you've been screwing around with something you
> >> know nothing about and did it to yourself, the OS didn't just up and
> >> decide it was going to have a bad day.
> >
> >I have it from a reliable source (the little voices in my head) that one
> >of the BSOD crashes mentioned by nb:
> >
> >http://digilander.libero.it/torshind/bsod/mcd_bsod.jpg
> >
> >was caused by the customer in the McDonalds drive-through trying to
> >order beetroot on his hamburger. Obviously, the Windows OS was never
> >designed to handle something like that!
>
>
> Thanks for the insider information!
>
> The McDonald's drive in order screen isn't something I work with on an
> everyday basis, but IMO what you posted was a case in point that
> software causes the problem.

You *are* aware that the OS is software? The most complicated software
on the machine, but still just software? And that the BSoD is an OS
software failure?

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA

In article >,
notbob > wrote:

> On 2009-01-30, sf > wrote:
> > On Thu, 29 Jan 2009 16:50:01 GMT, notbob > wrote:
> >
> >>Nevermind. I keep forgetting you M$ disciples live on a river in Egypt.
> >
> > We also don't have Microsoft OS problems like you supposed gurus of
> > computerland have.
>
> Of course you don't.

I suspect not. It sounds like she buys a machine with what she wants on
it, and uses it until it's obsolete or dies, and then buys another
machine that already has what she needs. The people who have the most
MS OS problems are those who are continually upgrading and fiddling.

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA

On Thu, 29 Jan 2009 16:50:01 GMT, notbob wrote:

> On 2009-01-29, sf > wrote:
>
>> My only retort is that if you get that blue screen of death and your
>> hard drive isn't dead, you've been screwing around with something you
>> know nothing about and did it to yourself, the OS didn't just up and
>> decide it was going to have a bad day.
>
> Apparently, you missed the CNN video showing W98 BSoDing with Bill Gates
> feigning surprise. If Bill and his minions can't prevent it, what chance do
> the hoi polloi have.
>
> I and my cow orkers had to put up with the ol BSoD half a dozen times a day,
> this with half a dozen IT support people and 3 hardware techs not 100 feet
> away. The standard IT support hotline response was, "Have you tried
> rebooting it?". We stopped bothering to call.
>
> Nevermind. I keep forgetting you M$ disciples live on a river in Egypt.
>
> nb

'm$ disciples'? i've seen far more messianic fervor on the parts of linux
and mac o.s. users.

your pal,
blake

On 2009-01-30, blake murphy > wrote:

> 'm$ disciples'? i've seen far more messianic fervor on the parts of linux
> and mac o.s. users.

Apple maybe. You haven't seen real fervor until you get the " ...when they
pry it from my cold dead hands!" line over XP. When asked why, it's usually
no comment or some insightful reason like, "cuz I likes it". At least linux
fans can give valid compelling reasons... in excrutiating detail.

nb

Dan Abel wrote:

> You *are* aware that the OS is software? The most complicated software
> on the machine, but still just software? And that the BSoD is an OS
> software failure?
>

I'm not trying to be funny but I haven't seen one of those in a couple
of years. Are you saying it's literally the BSoD like in the old days? I
did not know that they existed in Vista, at least I have not seen one.

I have gotten some lockups but that's a rare occurrence. My guess is
that if your computer locks up, it's probably the fault of the
application you're running.

The reality is that any glitches you have with the OS and applications
can and should be solved early on and that it is entirely possible to
run Vista without problems. My guess is that if you cannot get Vista to
run, it is because you lack the technical ability - there's no shame in
this, but you shouldn't blame Vista either. And please don't tell me
that you're the head of the computer technical services of blah, blah,
blah since this would only confirm that you don't have the ability to
fix a system. :-)

I'm surprised that folks forget that there was a big resistance and
bitching about XP when it first came out. The exact same problems of
incompatibility with applications and it was always this BSoD thing. All
this is not new. I was opposed the the win environment and stuck with
DOS6 until about 1999.

The idea that Vista users love M$ is an incorrect one. No doubt there's
a few folks that love Microsoft but most of us are just being pragmatic
about the few choices we have. It's simply the OS that makes the most
sense at the moment. Hell, I'd try Apple's OS the first day they release
a version that can be run on a machine that I can assemble myself and
not pre-loaded in an expensive white box. I might even be shouting
"phrase Jesus!" when that day arrives - but I'm not holding my breath. :-)

On 2009-01-30, dsi1 > wrote:

> of years. Are you saying it's literally the BSoD like in the old days? I
> did not know that they existed in Vista, at least I have not seen one.

Google bsod + vista and get tons of links.

> I have gotten some lockups but that's a rare occurrence. My guess is
> that if your computer locks up, it's probably the fault of the
> application you're running.

I will agree that lockups in computers is almost universal. Yes, linux too.
How often is occurs is a key issue.

> run, it is because you lack the technical ability -

Whoa! Wait a minute, dude. Windows is supposed to be for those computer
users that lack technical ability.

> I'm surprised that folks forget that there was a big resistance and
> bitching about XP when it first came out. The exact same problems of
> incompatibility with applications and it was always this BSoD thing. All
> this is not new.

Too true, but it leaves a bitter taste in one's mouth if you've just shelled
out good money for a buggy OS and have to shell out even more money to buy
more software to address the security holes left open by the apathetic
creators of said OS.

> The idea that Vista users love M$ is an incorrect one. No doubt there's
> a few folks that love Microsoft but most of us are just being pragmatic
> about the few choices we have.

Say what!? "few choices"? You have tons of choices. The choice you seem
to be limiting yourself to is the choice to let M$ do your thinking for you
and your being unwilling to actually use your brain to learn how to use
software that is based entirely on the concept of choice. Apparently, your
definition of pragmatic is "too damn lazy".

> It's simply the OS that makes the most
> sense at the moment.

For who? People who are too busy to actually think?

> "phrase Jesus!" when that day arrives - but I'm not holding my breath. :-)

What are you holding?

nb

notbob wrote:
> On 2009-01-30, dsi1 > wrote:
>
>> of years. Are you saying it's literally the BSoD like in the old days? I
>> did not know that they existed in Vista, at least I have not seen one.
>
> Google bsod + vista and get tons of links.


Google bsod + linux and get tons of links.

>
>> I have gotten some lockups but that's a rare occurrence. My guess is
>> that if your computer locks up, it's probably the fault of the
>> application you're running.
>
> I will agree that lockups in computers is almost universal. Yes, linux too.
> How often is occurs is a key issue.

As I say, it's a rare occurrence.

>
>> run, it is because you lack the technical ability -
>
> Whoa! Wait a minute, dude. Windows is supposed to be for those computer
> users that lack technical ability.

Really? I don't buy that one.

>
>> I'm surprised that folks forget that there was a big resistance and
>> bitching about XP when it first came out. The exact same problems of
>> incompatibility with applications and it was always this BSoD thing. All
>> this is not new.
>
> Too true, but it leaves a bitter taste in one's mouth if you've just shelled
> out good money for a buggy OS and have to shell out even more money to buy
> more software to address the security holes left open by the apathetic
> creators of said OS.

Gee, I've spent $0 - guess I'm a great shopper!

>
>> The idea that Vista users love M$ is an incorrect one. No doubt there's
>> a few folks that love Microsoft but most of us are just being pragmatic
>> about the few choices we have.
>
> Say what!? "few choices"? You have tons of choices. The choice you seem
> to be limiting yourself to is the choice to let M$ do your thinking for you
> and your being unwilling to actually use your brain to learn how to use
> software that is based entirely on the concept of choice. Apparently, your
> definition of pragmatic is "too damn lazy".

Tons of choices are Linux and... what?

>
>> It's simply the OS that makes the most
>> sense at the moment.
>
> For who? People who are too busy to actually think?

Don't hassle me if you cannot get Vista to work without crashing. My
technical skills with OS is meager but it's enough that I can at least
do that. Linux eggheads just don't appreciate the fact the for most
folks, Linux ain't ready for prime time. And most folks don't want to be
referring to a manual just to load in programs and get them configured
and running. Obviously, you do. Go with God my son. :-)

>
>> "phrase Jesus!" when that day arrives - but I'm not holding my breath. :-)
>
> What are you holding?
>
> nb