I've dumped Linux and moved to Windows XP.

[Chaos Master]

Trent (trentallenblack@hotmail.com) caused an illegal operation in module
<19d1da79.0406141638.60a7e96b@posting.google.com>:

[removed all other crossposts. I am sick of this thread]

maintainability? damn, it can't even find my freaking printer, my HP
scanner, and when it BREAKS, i have to hire some guru from the 1960's
to
fix it.

My biggest problem of Linux is this one... I have some old hardware which has no
support for Linux. And my system runs no server (OK. OK. It runs a small FTP
server) so I don't bother if it crashes. If it works with Windows, why fix it?

[]s
--
Š Chaos Master | "These wounds won't seem to heal
posting from BR! | This pain is just too real
ask for ICQ/MSN or| There's just too much that time can't erase"
e-mail address | -- Evanescence, "My Immortal"

 

[Jan Panteltje]

**** Post for FREE via your newsreader at post.usenet.com ****

On a sunny day (Tue, 15 Jun 2004 02:04:46 GMT) it happened "Sir Charles W.
Shults III" <NOaichipSPAM@cfl.rr.com> wrote in
<2Pszc.92429$0X2.4157499@twister.tampabay.rr.com>:

"Terry Given" <the_domes@xtra.co.nz> wrote in message
news:37gzc.2194$s52.73852@news.xtra.co.nz...

my pet peeve is the "computers for retards" philosophy underpinning shit
like talking paper clips and puppy dogs. fuck that, make the poxy thing
boot
faster.

Absolutely! Computers double in speed every eighteen months, and this
1.8 GHz takes longer to boot that the damned 4.77 MHz IBM PC. We are being
swindled somewhere along the way, and it is our money that is paying for the
resources that are being burned.
Since my present machines are 1.8 GHz and 2.2 GHz and they crash
constantly, lock up for no good reason, and take forever to boot, it is
pretty clear that some horribly wrong has happened to computer technology as
a whole. Gates will roast in Hell for quite some time to come, surely, but
that is poor repayment for the lack of use we get out of these digital
doorstops we have today.
We need certain functionality without a doubt, such as the ability to
see graphics and hear audio, and the ability to have GUI and mouse functions
with lots of tasks operating at once, but there is no reason for software to
be so bloated and corrupt.
I think a huge rewrite of the most basic level DOS would be a wonderful
thing. It would be very fast, give absolute control over the hardware, and
not require gigabytes of software to perform text editing functions or play
solitaire. Burt enough of my rant.

Cheers!
Just one thing, even without going into the MS versus Linux controversy,

if your PC crashes that often, you likely have a hardware problem.
One thing that needs checking is your memory, run some advanced memory tests.
Else, next time you make your own, perhaps ask in comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips
for what to buy and what to avoid (or ask now).
I have zero hardware crashes in the last 3 years.
Seen some blue screens in MS Windows, I KNOW how to screw my Linux box,
but it normally will just keep running.

JP

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
*** Usenet.com - The #1 Usenet Newsgroup Service on The Planet! ***
http://www.usenet.com
Unlimited Download - 19 Seperate Servers - 90,000 groups - Uncensored
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

 

[Jim Thompson]

On Mon, 14 Jun 2004 19:09:14 -0700, Chris Carlen
<crobc@BOGUS_FIELD.earthlink.net> wrote:

Jim Thompson wrote:
I've been using Win2K for about 2 years, NT4 before that. I can't
recall a crash. The only reboots I do are upon software installs. My
heavily-used PSpice machine is showing more than a month of "system
idle" time ;-)

I think this the Linux people are just like the toooobz people,
irrational fanaticism.

...Jim Thompson

It's not about crashing anymore Jim. Every desktop user knows that
Windows rarely crashes as a desktop OS, and every network admin knows
that Windows falls apart in the server room, with a reliability at leat
an order of magnitude lower than Linux/UNIX.

[snip]

I don't run any servers... my network is strictly peer-to-peer.

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, P.E. | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona Voice480)460-2350 | |
| E-mail Address at Website Fax480)460-2142 | Brass Rat |
| http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.

 

[David T. Johnson]

David H. McCoy wrote:

In article <10cri8rh60hlod7@corp.supernews.com>, djohnson@isomedia.com
says...

David H. McCoy wrote:

In article <40ccd87a$0$25487$45beb828@newscene.com>, abc@def.ghi says...


I'm not trying to incite a riot here, but I can't just sit here and let
you spout this nonsense. What would *your* reaction be to someone
claiming all sorts of defects in OS/2 (or Linux), but basing his
reasoning on OS/2 2.1 (or Red Hat 5).

Mike



That's pretty typical here. I believe that the problem is that OS/2
hasn't seen a significant change since OS/2 Warp 4, the last version I
used, so it appears to be difficult to understand that other operating
systems are on the move.

OS/2 has seen many significant changes since OS/2 Warp 4 was released in
1996. IBM has released two new "Convenience Pack" versions of OS/2 since
Warp 4 that they called 'OS/2 v4.51' (2000) and 'OS/2 v4.52' (2002).
These were fully-installable new updated versions of OS/2. The most
notable features they had that were not in Warp 4 were the JFS file
system (in addition to FAT and HPFS), the Logical Volume Manager (LVM),
Java 2 support, a 32-bit TCP/IP stack, improved peer-to-peer
networking, USB support, support for DBCS fonts, Geyserville power
management, better support for PNP devices, a revamped installer,
updated device driver options, and a lot of general improvements to the
WPS desktop function and performance, although its appearance remained
nearly the same as in Warp 4. The Warp 4.51 installer would let you
install over the top of a Warp 4 install and preserve your old Warp 4
desktop. The Warp 4.52 installer would let you install over the top of
a Warp 4.51 installer and preserve your Warp 4.51 desktop. You can
still get these from IBM by purchasing an OS/2 license from their
Passport Advantage online site and then purchasing a 'OS/2 Media Pack'
which comes with all of the Warp 4 CDs, the Warp 4.51 CDs, the Warp 4.52
CDs, and the 'Software Choice' CDs (which had software updates and
device driver additions.) Go to this site and click on the 'How to Buy'
link.

http://www-306.ibm.com/software/os/warp/swchoice/

The latest fixpack for Warp 4 is fixpack 17 (xr_m017) and the latest
fixpack for Warp 4.51 or Warp 4.52 is fixpack 4 (xr_c004). This site
has links to all of these. An IBM subscription ID and password are
needed to access them which you get if you purchase a one-year OS/2
maintenance license.

http://ps.software.ibm.com/os2fixp/softupd.html




You consider Java support and a tcpip stack significant? That's stuff
that Windows had back in 96. So OS/2 matches 96 Windows? Okay.

OS/2 v4 shipped with Java 1.0 support in the box in 1996. Neither

Windows 95, Windows NT4, nor Windows 98SE ever shipped with *any* java
support whatsoever. Warp 3 was already shipping with a TCP/IP stack and
web browser in 1994 while Microsoft was still shipping Windows 3.1 which
lacked those.

--
Posted with OS/2 Warp 4.52
and IBM Web Browser v2.0.2

 

[Snuffelluffogus]

Gumboot <cguff113@upywf-gumboot.asaistterl.com> wrote in message news:<jq61q1-061.ln1@bovine.muck.net.nz>...

Snuffelluffogus wrote:
The problem is that Linux proponents have taken the erroneous libertarian
attitude that the Linux movement must always be growing, improving,
becoming more bloated.

There's a generation of Linux enthusiasts that do indeed strive for
precisely that... but only because they want Linux to be just the same
as Windows, and Windows is like that.

It's the majority, not a "generation". Personally I could do without the bloat,
without the elaborate GUIs, without all the junk that only sysadmins care about.
I think it's time to start over frankly. Too many hands in the pie.

 

[Julius Junghans]

On Mon, 14 Jun 2004 19:09:14 -0700
Chris Carlen <crobc@BOGUS_FIELD.earthlink.net> wrote:

Jim Thompson wrote:
I've been using Win2K for about 2 years, NT4 before that. I can't
recall a crash. The only reboots I do are upon software installs. My
heavily-used PSpice machine is showing more than a month of "system
idle" time ;-)

I think this the Linux people are just like the toooobz people,
irrational fanaticism.

...Jim Thompson

It's not about crashing anymore Jim. Every desktop user knows that
Windows rarely crashes as a desktop OS, and every network admin knows
that Windows falls apart in the server room, with a reliability at leat
an order of magnitude lower than Linux/UNIX.

In fact, I will admit, sometimes the Linux desktop can crash more than
Windows 2000, though my experience is limited. I only use Win2k to run
one or two programs at a time, like a development tool and a
filemanager, or a browser if I'm forced into it for some odd reason.

So I never load it much. Linux I load heavily, and it crashes every
once in a while. It's hard to quantify because Linux is so layered.
There is the KDE desktop, on top of the X Window system, on top of the
Linux kernel. Any of it can crash due to a bad driver or something. So
sometimes it happens. Usually related to a video card and some program
like a sound or video player that needs root permissions.

The point is that it isn't about crashing or stability anymore. It is
about freedom, something I think you might care about Jim.

Perhaps you should read this:

http://www.fourmilab.ch/documents/digital-imprimatur/


And when you are done read about Palladium, or whatever they have named
it these days.




--
_____________________
Christopher R. Carlen
crobc@earthlink.net
Suse 8.1 Linux 2.4.19

thats your point of view, my 2.4 machine was running very stable....if it crashed it was something nvidia related. the never nvidia drivers are very stable on my fx5900.
and even with 2.6.6 its running fine. and its loaded, cause linux is a better multitasking os then windows - my opinion.

 

[Julius Junghans]

On Mon, 14 Jun 2004 22:18:15 -0400
David H. McCoy <fake@mail.com> wrote:

In article <10cri8rh60hlod7@corp.supernews.com>, djohnson@isomedia.com
says...
David H. McCoy wrote:
In article <40ccd87a$0$25487$45beb828@newscene.com>, abc@def.ghi says...

I'm not trying to incite a riot here, but I can't just sit here and let
you spout this nonsense. What would *your* reaction be to someone
claiming all sorts of defects in OS/2 (or Linux), but basing his
reasoning on OS/2 2.1 (or Red Hat 5).

Mike



That's pretty typical here. I believe that the problem is that OS/2
hasn't seen a significant change since OS/2 Warp 4, the last version I
used, so it appears to be difficult to understand that other operating
systems are on the move.

OS/2 has seen many significant changes since OS/2 Warp 4 was released in
1996. IBM has released two new "Convenience Pack" versions of OS/2 since
Warp 4 that they called 'OS/2 v4.51' (2000) and 'OS/2 v4.52' (2002).
These were fully-installable new updated versions of OS/2. The most
notable features they had that were not in Warp 4 were the JFS file
system (in addition to FAT and HPFS), the Logical Volume Manager (LVM),
Java 2 support, a 32-bit TCP/IP stack, improved peer-to-peer
networking, USB support, support for DBCS fonts, Geyserville power
management, better support for PNP devices, a revamped installer,
updated device driver options, and a lot of general improvements to the
WPS desktop function and performance, although its appearance remained
nearly the same as in Warp 4. The Warp 4.51 installer would let you
install over the top of a Warp 4 install and preserve your old Warp 4
desktop. The Warp 4.52 installer would let you install over the top of
a Warp 4.51 installer and preserve your Warp 4.51 desktop. You can
still get these from IBM by purchasing an OS/2 license from their
Passport Advantage online site and then purchasing a 'OS/2 Media Pack'
which comes with all of the Warp 4 CDs, the Warp 4.51 CDs, the Warp 4.52
CDs, and the 'Software Choice' CDs (which had software updates and
device driver additions.) Go to this site and click on the 'How to Buy'
link.

http://www-306.ibm.com/software/os/warp/swchoice/

The latest fixpack for Warp 4 is fixpack 17 (xr_m017) and the latest
fixpack for Warp 4.51 or Warp 4.52 is fixpack 4 (xr_c004). This site
has links to all of these. An IBM subscription ID and password are
needed to access them which you get if you purchase a one-year OS/2
maintenance license.

http://ps.software.ibm.com/os2fixp/softupd.html



You consider Java support and a tcpip stack significant? That's stuff
that Windows had back in 96. So OS/2 matches 96 Windows? Okay.

--
--------------------------------------
David H. McCoy


--------------------------------------

who the hell needs java? its just a toy, sometimes nice, but at all you dont need it.

 

[Gumboot]

Snuffelluffogus wrote:

Personally I could do without the bloat, without the elaborate GUIs,
without all the junk that only sysadmins care about.

You don't have to install much of that crap, of course. Aside from the
kernel... that kernel is nearly filling out its logo. Tux may need more
fattening up to properly represent Linux, soon.

I think it's time to start over frankly. Too many hands in the pie.

BSD family suffered much less of that cancerous growth. They're the
easiest place to hide without making an effort.

 

[The Ghost In The Machine]

In comp.os.linux.advocacy, David H McCoy
<fake@mail.com>
wrote
on Mon, 14 Jun 2004 22:18:15 -0400
<MPG.1b38266e89ef3e9a989788@news.east.cox.net>:

In article <10cri8rh60hlod7@corp.supernews.com>, djohnson@isomedia.com
says...
David H. McCoy wrote:
In article <40ccd87a$0$25487$45beb828@newscene.com>, abc@def.ghi says...

I'm not trying to incite a riot here, but I can't just sit here and let
you spout this nonsense. What would *your* reaction be to someone
claiming all sorts of defects in OS/2 (or Linux), but basing his
reasoning on OS/2 2.1 (or Red Hat 5).

Mike



That's pretty typical here. I believe that the problem is that OS/2
hasn't seen a significant change since OS/2 Warp 4, the last version I
used, so it appears to be difficult to understand that other operating
systems are on the move.

OS/2 has seen many significant changes since OS/2 Warp 4 was released in
1996. IBM has released two new "Convenience Pack" versions of OS/2 since
Warp 4 that they called 'OS/2 v4.51' (2000) and 'OS/2 v4.52' (2002).
These were fully-installable new updated versions of OS/2. The most
notable features they had that were not in Warp 4 were the JFS file
system (in addition to FAT and HPFS), the Logical Volume Manager (LVM),
Java 2 support, a 32-bit TCP/IP stack, improved peer-to-peer
networking, USB support, support for DBCS fonts, Geyserville power
management, better support for PNP devices, a revamped installer,
updated device driver options, and a lot of general improvements to the
WPS desktop function and performance, although its appearance remained
nearly the same as in Warp 4. The Warp 4.51 installer would let you
install over the top of a Warp 4 install and preserve your old Warp 4
desktop. The Warp 4.52 installer would let you install over the top of
a Warp 4.51 installer and preserve your Warp 4.51 desktop. You can
still get these from IBM by purchasing an OS/2 license from their
Passport Advantage online site and then purchasing a 'OS/2 Media Pack'
which comes with all of the Warp 4 CDs, the Warp 4.51 CDs, the Warp 4.52
CDs, and the 'Software Choice' CDs (which had software updates and
device driver additions.) Go to this site and click on the 'How to Buy'
link.

http://www-306.ibm.com/software/os/warp/swchoice/

The latest fixpack for Warp 4 is fixpack 17 (xr_m017) and the latest
fixpack for Warp 4.51 or Warp 4.52 is fixpack 4 (xr_c004). This site
has links to all of these. An IBM subscription ID and password are
needed to access them which you get if you purchase a one-year OS/2
maintenance license.

http://ps.software.ibm.com/os2fixp/softupd.html



You consider Java support and a tcpip stack significant? That's stuff
that Windows had back in 96. So OS/2 matches 96 Windows? Okay.

Windows had TCP/IP stack support back in *'89*. (Trumpet Winsock
was a 3rdparty addon product that filled the bill in the 3.1 days.)
Kludgy, ugly, and slightly dodgy (and very hard to set up properly,
though that wasn't Trumpet's fault, that was DOS's) -- but it worked.

Win95's innovation was to make the TCP/IP stack easier to set up.
I don't know if it made the stack any better, admittedly.

--
#191, ewill3@earthlink.net
It's still legal to go .sigless.

 

[Gregory L. Hansen]

In article <5f063e31.0406150753.21ffbb75@posting.google.com>,
Snuffelluffogus <darkred@myway.com> wrote:

Gumboot <cguff113@upywf-gumboot.asaistterl.com> wrote in message
news:<jq61q1-061.ln1@bovine.muck.net.nz>...
Snuffelluffogus wrote:
The problem is that Linux proponents have taken the erroneous libertarian
attitude that the Linux movement must always be growing, improving,
becoming more bloated.

There's a generation of Linux enthusiasts that do indeed strive for
precisely that... but only because they want Linux to be just the same
as Windows, and Windows is like that.

It's the majority, not a "generation". Personally I could do without the bloat,
without the elaborate GUIs, without all the junk that only sysadmins care about.
I think it's time to start over frankly. Too many hands in the pie.

http://www.linuxlinks.com/Distributions/Mini_Distributions/

How about a Linux that will fit onto a floppy?


--
"The main, if not the only, function of the word aether has been to
furnish a nominative case to the verb 'to undulate'."
-- the Earl of Salisbury, 1894

 

[Jim Thompson]

On Mon, 14 Jun 2004 19:09:14 -0700, Chris Carlen
<crobc@BOGUS_FIELD.earthlink.net> wrote:

Jim Thompson wrote:
I've been using Win2K for about 2 years, NT4 before that. I can't
recall a crash. The only reboots I do are upon software installs. My
heavily-used PSpice machine is showing more than a month of "system
idle" time ;-)

I think this the Linux people are just like the toooobz people,
irrational fanaticism.

...Jim Thompson

It's not about crashing anymore Jim. Every desktop user knows that
Windows rarely crashes as a desktop OS, and every network admin knows
that Windows falls apart in the server room, with a reliability at leat
an order of magnitude lower than Linux/UNIX.

In fact, I will admit, sometimes the Linux desktop can crash more than
Windows 2000, though my experience is limited. I only use Win2k to run
one or two programs at a time, like a development tool and a
filemanager, or a browser if I'm forced into it for some odd reason.

So I never load it much. Linux I load heavily, and it crashes every
once in a while. It's hard to quantify because Linux is so layered.
There is the KDE desktop, on top of the X Window system, on top of the
Linux kernel. Any of it can crash due to a bad driver or something. So
sometimes it happens. Usually related to a video card and some program
like a sound or video player that needs root permissions.

The point is that it isn't about crashing or stability anymore. It is
about freedom, something I think you might care about Jim.

Perhaps you should read this:

http://www.fourmilab.ch/documents/digital-imprimatur/


And when you are done read about Palladium, or whatever they have named
it these days.

Discussing Java, Windows, Linux or tooooobz is like discussing
religion, so I'm bowing out ;-)

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, P.E. | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona Voice480)460-2350 | |
| E-mail Address at Website Fax480)460-2142 | Brass Rat |
| http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.

 

[Jim Backus]

On Tue, 15 Jun 2004 02:19:53 UTC, David H. McCoy <fake@mail.com>
wrote:

Appears? So your interpretation qualifies as a feature? OS/2 does not
self-repair.

Yes - my experience is that if OS/2 suffers a bad crash, such as might
be caused by a power outage, it may be unstable and have faults when
restarted. However after a few reboots these faults are cleared. That
shows a degree of self repair.

--
Jim Backus OS/2 user since 1994
bona fide replies to j <dot> backus <the circle thingy> jita <dot>
demon <dot> co <dot> uk

 

[Snuffelluffogus]

There's a generation of Linux enthusiasts that do indeed strive for
precisely that... but only because they want Linux to be just the same
as Windows, and Windows is like that.

It's the majority, not a "generation". Personally I could do without the bloat,
without the elaborate GUIs, without all the junk that only sysadmins care about.
I think it's time to start over frankly. Too many hands in the pie.


http://www.linuxlinks.com/Distributions/Mini_Distributions/

How about a Linux that will fit onto a floppy?

Been there, done that. That's WITHOUT hardly anything useful e.g.
a C compiler. Whereas compare to MSDOS and Turbo C, which can be
distributed on 2 floppies.

Linux is patently obese.

 

[Snuffelluffogus]

Gumboot <apgec125gumboot@oeueo.aslniiaho.com> wrote in message

I think it's time to start over frankly. Too many hands in the pie.

BSD family suffered much less of that cancerous growth. They're the
easiest place to hide without making an effort.

But is there a single-floppy boot?

 

[David H. McCoy]

In article <TpquPuPd0tCd-pn2-hln5NEwFddzq@localhost>, jhb@nospam.co.uk
says...

On Tue, 15 Jun 2004 02:19:53 UTC, David H. McCoy <fake@mail.com
wrote:

Appears? So your interpretation qualifies as a feature? OS/2 does not
self-repair.


Yes - my experience is that if OS/2 suffers a bad crash, such as might
be caused by a power outage, it may be unstable and have faults when
restarted. However after a few reboots these faults are cleared. That
shows a degree of self repair.

That is your interpretation. If that is your standard, then Windows XP,
in my experience, also self-repairs, except it isn't during a crash, but
a power outage.

And I don't get the instability or reboots.
--
--------------------------------------
David H. McCoy


--------------------------------------

 

[David H. McCoy]

In article <calm9n$kg8$1@peabody.colorado.edu>,
bowenjm@rintintin.colorado.edu says...

In article <qhqqc0pt6k4hdh3mjifu6bmq1c6uf1biii@4ax.com>,
Ken <___ken3@telia.com> wrote:
On Sun, 13 Jun 2004 20:03:25 -0400, David H. McCoy <fake@mail.com
wrote:

NT 4 was the version of Windows that migrated me from OS/2. I
personally, after my time using OS/2 and my job of working on Unix,
found it very stable.

I used NT4 for 3 years 24/7 and had never a crash.
It was crash proof in my home computer.


You weren't pushing it then. I've crashed every operating system I've
ever used. Microsoft claimed uptimes in the range of 5 days for NT4 when
Windows 2000 came out.


I have also, but I definitely had more that 5 days of uptime. I used NT4

for gaming and software development including running DBs.
--
--------------------------------------
David H. McCoy


--------------------------------------

 

[David H. McCoy]

In article <20040615194959.3cd9d3e9.julius.junghans@gmx.de>,
julius.junghans@gmx.de says...

On Mon, 14 Jun 2004 22:18:15 -0400
David H. McCoy <fake@mail.com> wrote:

In article <10cri8rh60hlod7@corp.supernews.com>, djohnson@isomedia.com
says...
David H. McCoy wrote:
In article <40ccd87a$0$25487$45beb828@newscene.com>, abc@def.ghi says...

I'm not trying to incite a riot here, but I can't just sit here and let
you spout this nonsense. What would *your* reaction be to someone
claiming all sorts of defects in OS/2 (or Linux), but basing his
reasoning on OS/2 2.1 (or Red Hat 5).

Mike



That's pretty typical here. I believe that the problem is that OS/2
hasn't seen a significant change since OS/2 Warp 4, the last version I
used, so it appears to be difficult to understand that other operating
systems are on the move.

OS/2 has seen many significant changes since OS/2 Warp 4 was released in
1996. IBM has released two new "Convenience Pack" versions of OS/2 since
Warp 4 that they called 'OS/2 v4.51' (2000) and 'OS/2 v4.52' (2002).
These were fully-installable new updated versions of OS/2. The most
notable features they had that were not in Warp 4 were the JFS file
system (in addition to FAT and HPFS), the Logical Volume Manager (LVM),
Java 2 support, a 32-bit TCP/IP stack, improved peer-to-peer
networking, USB support, support for DBCS fonts, Geyserville power
management, better support for PNP devices, a revamped installer,
updated device driver options, and a lot of general improvements to the
WPS desktop function and performance, although its appearance remained
nearly the same as in Warp 4. The Warp 4.51 installer would let you
install over the top of a Warp 4 install and preserve your old Warp 4
desktop. The Warp 4.52 installer would let you install over the top of
a Warp 4.51 installer and preserve your Warp 4.51 desktop. You can
still get these from IBM by purchasing an OS/2 license from their
Passport Advantage online site and then purchasing a 'OS/2 Media Pack'
which comes with all of the Warp 4 CDs, the Warp 4.51 CDs, the Warp 4.52
CDs, and the 'Software Choice' CDs (which had software updates and
device driver additions.) Go to this site and click on the 'How to Buy'
link.

http://www-306.ibm.com/software/os/warp/swchoice/

The latest fixpack for Warp 4 is fixpack 17 (xr_m017) and the latest
fixpack for Warp 4.51 or Warp 4.52 is fixpack 4 (xr_c004). This site
has links to all of these. An IBM subscription ID and password are
needed to access them which you get if you purchase a one-year OS/2
maintenance license.

http://ps.software.ibm.com/os2fixp/softupd.html



You consider Java support and a tcpip stack significant? That's stuff
that Windows had back in 96. So OS/2 matches 96 Windows? Okay.

--
--------------------------------------
David H. McCoy


--------------------------------------

who the hell needs java? its just a toy, sometimes nice, but at all you dont need it.

Now you are just being silly. Java is used to write some pretty robust

applications. I should know. I do this. And if it is a toy, one gets
paid well to play.
--
--------------------------------------
David H. McCoy


--------------------------------------

 

[David H. McCoy]

In article <7hu3q1-drn.ln1@lexi2.athghost7038suus.net>,
ewill@aurigae.athghost7038suus.net says...

In comp.os.linux.advocacy, David H McCoy
fake@mail.com
wrote
on Mon, 14 Jun 2004 22:18:15 -0400
MPG.1b38266e89ef3e9a989788@news.east.cox.net>:
In article <10cri8rh60hlod7@corp.supernews.com>, djohnson@isomedia.com
says...
David H. McCoy wrote:
In article <40ccd87a$0$25487$45beb828@newscene.com>, abc@def.ghi says...

I'm not trying to incite a riot here, but I can't just sit here and let
you spout this nonsense. What would *your* reaction be to someone
claiming all sorts of defects in OS/2 (or Linux), but basing his
reasoning on OS/2 2.1 (or Red Hat 5).

Mike



That's pretty typical here. I believe that the problem is that OS/2
hasn't seen a significant change since OS/2 Warp 4, the last version I
used, so it appears to be difficult to understand that other operating
systems are on the move.

OS/2 has seen many significant changes since OS/2 Warp 4 was released in
1996. IBM has released two new "Convenience Pack" versions of OS/2 since
Warp 4 that they called 'OS/2 v4.51' (2000) and 'OS/2 v4.52' (2002).
These were fully-installable new updated versions of OS/2. The most
notable features they had that were not in Warp 4 were the JFS file
system (in addition to FAT and HPFS), the Logical Volume Manager (LVM),
Java 2 support, a 32-bit TCP/IP stack, improved peer-to-peer
networking, USB support, support for DBCS fonts, Geyserville power
management, better support for PNP devices, a revamped installer,
updated device driver options, and a lot of general improvements to the
WPS desktop function and performance, although its appearance remained
nearly the same as in Warp 4. The Warp 4.51 installer would let you
install over the top of a Warp 4 install and preserve your old Warp 4
desktop. The Warp 4.52 installer would let you install over the top of
a Warp 4.51 installer and preserve your Warp 4.51 desktop. You can
still get these from IBM by purchasing an OS/2 license from their
Passport Advantage online site and then purchasing a 'OS/2 Media Pack'
which comes with all of the Warp 4 CDs, the Warp 4.51 CDs, the Warp 4.52
CDs, and the 'Software Choice' CDs (which had software updates and
device driver additions.) Go to this site and click on the 'How to Buy'
link.

http://www-306.ibm.com/software/os/warp/swchoice/

The latest fixpack for Warp 4 is fixpack 17 (xr_m017) and the latest
fixpack for Warp 4.51 or Warp 4.52 is fixpack 4 (xr_c004). This site
has links to all of these. An IBM subscription ID and password are
needed to access them which you get if you purchase a one-year OS/2
maintenance license.

http://ps.software.ibm.com/os2fixp/softupd.html



You consider Java support and a tcpip stack significant? That's stuff
that Windows had back in 96. So OS/2 matches 96 Windows? Okay.

Windows had TCP/IP stack support back in *'89*. (Trumpet Winsock
was a 3rdparty addon product that filled the bill in the 3.1 days.)
Kludgy, ugly, and slightly dodgy (and very hard to set up properly,
though that wasn't Trumpet's fault, that was DOS's) -- but it worked.

Win95's innovation was to make the TCP/IP stack easier to set up.
I don't know if it made the stack any better, admittedly.

Indeed. But it wasn't 32-bit and that was his point.
--
--------------------------------------
David H. McCoy


--------------------------------------

 

[Jan Panteltje]

**** Post for FREE via your newsreader at post.usenet.com ****

On a sunny day (15 Jun 2004 16:36:16 -0700) it happened darkred@myway.com
(Snuffelluffogus) wrote in <5f063e31.0406151536.9ce7052@posting.google.com>:

How about a Linux that will fit onto a floppy?

Been there, done that. That's WITHOUT hardly anything useful e.g.
a C compiler. Whereas compare to MSDOS and Turbo C, which can be
distributed on 2 floppies.
Linux is a multi-tasking kernel, MSDOS is not.

Floppies are out anyways, use memory stick.


-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
*** Usenet.com - The #1 Usenet Newsgroup Service on The Planet! ***
http://www.usenet.com
Unlimited Download - 19 Seperate Servers - 90,000 groups - Uncensored
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

 

[Chuck Harris]

Snuffelluffogus wrote:

http://www.linuxlinks.com/Distributions/Mini_Distributions/

How about a Linux that will fit onto a floppy?


Been there, done that. That's WITHOUT hardly anything useful e.g.
a C compiler. Whereas compare to MSDOS and Turbo C, which can be
distributed on 2 floppies.

Linux is patently obese.

Not true! In its usual distribution form, linux comes with hundreds
of drivers to allow for all the different hardware combination
possibilities. If you strip the kernel down so that it only has
the drivers you are actually going to use (just like we used to do
back in the MSDOG days), it can be quite tiny. Distributions like
Knoppix have all the drivers, and quite alot of applications, and fit
on a single mini bootable CD.

-Chuck Harris