|
|
Sounds strange indeed; it's not tea or coffee. Thanks for the tip, I'll be looking for the church-wine. For religious reasons, obviously 
Bastard Programmer from Hell 
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
|
|
|
|
|
I suggest to try it out of any ritual 
modified 19-Jan-21 21:04pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Eddy Vluggen wrote: the Commodore Amiga is still the superiour machine, in both hard- and software,
I feel a little sick by this fanboi propaganda, otherwise we could have a real nerd war now.
The Amiga is only so good because it's a true Atari and the software really sucked. The Atari ST's spartan and ugly TOS/GEM combination would have helped a lot. The ST was a true Commodore, after all.
The language is JavaScript. that of Mordor, which I will not utter here
This is Javascript. If you put big wheels and a racing stripe on a golf cart, it's still a f***ing golf cart.
"I don't know, extraterrestrial?"
"You mean like from space?"
"No, from Canada."
If software development were a circus, we would all be the clowns.
|
|
|
|
|
CDP1802 wrote: The Amiga is only so good because it's a true Atari
Ehr, no, even the competitor that Atari launched to rival the Amiga never caught on. You can call it propaganda, but we are talking about a full-color, windowed multitasking environment. In less than half a megabyte.
You're probably downloading more JavaScript than that if you visit this site 
Bastard Programmer from Hell
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
|
|
|
|
|
Ehr, yes. Look at this.[^] This man designed the chipsets of the early Atari consoles and 8 bit computers. And look what he later called his own company and what chipset he disigned then.
So I must welcome you to the Atari fanbois after all that time. The real irony is that the Atari ST, which actually was released before the Amiga and caught on a lot better in Europe, was designed and sold by the guys who designed the Commodore 64. Commodore had fired their boss, Jack Tramiel, who simply bought himself Atari and then sold their successor to the C64 under that name.
The Atari fanbois were defending their Commodore, the Commodore fanbois were fighting for their Atari. It can't get any more silly, but deeply religious fanbois (no matter of what, exactly) will never get it.
The language is JavaScript. that of Mordor, which I will not utter here
This is Javascript. If you put big wheels and a racing stripe on a golf cart, it's still a f***ing golf cart.
"I don't know, extraterrestrial?"
"You mean like from space?"
"No, from Canada."
If software development were a circus, we would all be the clowns.
|
|
|
|
|
I don't need to; I lived through that history. The 16 bit Amiga was more popular than the Atari ST.
Then machines that had trouble showing 16 colors took over.
Bastard Programmer from Hell
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
|
|
|
|
|
Eddy Vluggen wrote: The 16 bit Amiga was more popular than the Atari ST.
As a game console, yes. Not if you had work to do.
Eddy Vluggen wrote: Then machines that had trouble showing 16 colors took over.
That really felt like a huge step back into the stone age.
The language is JavaScript. that of Mordor, which I will not utter here
This is Javascript. If you put big wheels and a racing stripe on a golf cart, it's still a f***ing golf cart.
"I don't know, extraterrestrial?"
"You mean like from space?"
"No, from Canada."
If software development were a circus, we would all be the clowns.
|
|
|
|
|
CDP1802 wrote: As a game console, yes. Not if you had work to do.
Why as a game console? Due to the colorfull windows that it supported? What do you use now?
CDP1802 wrote: That really felt like a huge step back into the stone age.
Yes, mostly because some people would prefer WP5.1 over Kindwords[^].
Bastard Programmer from Hell
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
|
|
|
|
|
Eddy Vluggen wrote: Why as a game console? Due to the colorfull windows that it supported? What do you use now?
No, due to the low resolution. The Atari went the opposite way and came with a monochrome monitor, higher resolution and absolutely flicker free. If you had hours of work to do, your eyes would have been grateful for the ST.
And yes, back in the day I sat in the same room with the Amiga guys and passed the processor documentation back and forth. We used to agree that The hardware of the Amiga (plus the ST's monochrome monitor for work) with the Atari's TOS/GEM (plus the Amiga's multitasking) wiuld have been heaven on earth.
In a way you can have that now if you buy a FPGA based computer that can emulate both and then install the current (!) free version of TOS/GEM.
The language is JavaScript. that of Mordor, which I will not utter here
This is Javascript. If you put big wheels and a racing stripe on a golf cart, it's still a f***ing golf cart.
"I don't know, extraterrestrial?"
"You mean like from space?"
"No, from Canada."
If software development were a circus, we would all be the clowns.
|
|
|
|
|
CDP1802 wrote: No, due to the low resolution.
That is the most nonsensical argument this week 
Look the GUI up from the leading word-processor of that time
Bastard Programmer from Hell
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
|
|
|
|
|
Eddy Vluggen wrote: of that time
What time are we talking about? 1985, before the first Amiga found its way into a store? Or 1993 after Commodore already was out of business?
I know, I'm mean to you.  The truth is that both companies were unable to come up with an adequate next generation. What they did was too little and too late, so both went the way of the dinosaurs.
The language is JavaScript. that of Mordor, which I will not utter here
This is Javascript. If you put big wheels and a racing stripe on a golf cart, it's still a f***ing golf cart.
"I don't know, extraterrestrial?"
"You mean like from space?"
"No, from Canada."
If software development were a circus, we would all be the clowns.
|
|
|
|
|
CDP1802 wrote: The truth is that both companies were unable to come up with an adequate next generation
You mean something as cheap as a PC clone; not something technical better, but simply cheaper thanks to mass-production.
So yes, the original statement stands
Bastard Programmer from Hell 
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
|
|
|
|
|
It's not quite that easy. The new Motorola processors had some trouble keeping up with the faster 486 processors and the then upcoming Pentium. The VGA graphics cards were more primitive, but they supported ever higher resolutions, not that they were used very much. And then the new PCs got ever more memory and bigger hard disks.
So yes, at least until the Pentium PCs they were all about brute force, not sophistication.
The language is JavaScript. that of Mordor, which I will not utter here
This is Javascript. If you put big wheels and a racing stripe on a golf cart, it's still a f***ing golf cart.
"I don't know, extraterrestrial?"
"You mean like from space?"
"No, from Canada."
If software development were a circus, we would all be the clowns.
|
|
|
|
|
CDP1802 wrote: It's not quite that easy. The new Motorola processors had some trouble keeping up with the faster 486 processors
It is that easy. By the time the 486 came out the PC already owned the workplace.
Bastard Programmer from Hell
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
|
|
|
|
|
Eddy Vluggen wrote: Though the Commodore Amiga is still the superiour machine, in both hard- and software...
Have you seen this[^]?
Michael Martin
Australia
"I controlled my laughter and simple said "No,I am very busy,so I can't write any code for you". The moment they heard this all the smiling face turned into a sad looking face and one of them farted. So I had to leave the place as soon as possible."
- Mr.Prakash One Fine Saturday. 24/04/2004
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, too damn expensive for some nostalgia
Bastard Programmer from Hell
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
|
|
|
|
|
I can just about justify buying a Raspberry Pi kit for "research" (AKA playing around). I hate to think what my wife would do if I bought one of those.
If you have an important point to make, don't try to be subtle or clever. Use a pile driver. Hit the point once. Then come back and hit it again. Then hit it a third time - a tremendous whack.
--Winston Churchill
|
|
|
|
|
Ok, I'll bite.
Why did Windows 10 not allow the WannaCry virus to encrypt 10?
This is a tech board so it's ok to talk nuts and bolts.
I don't believe it for a second. Any virus who's payload is in a FedEx exe for example is OS agnostic and will run through the libraries on that PC and encrypt everything. Sure maybe because SMB1 is up to date on 10 it didn't spread from there to neighboring devices but that's only a nicety.
I have seen many windows 10 machine encrypted with ransomware before this latest outbreak btw.
The assertion that Windows 10 is somehow holy and righteous is just BS.
|
|
|
|
|
Sorry, but only to say it is BS does not help. What is your Suggestion to to it better, no not only better to do it right?
modified 19-Jan-21 21:04pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: The assertion that Windows 10 is somehow holy and righteous is just BS.
I was specifically referring to the Wanna Cry ransom virus. Windows 10 does not have the vulnerability that is exploited by that particular virus. Yes, it does not mean that 10 is immune to all versions of ransomware. You still have to take some basic precautions, even with 10!
Get me coffee and no one gets hurt!
|
|
|
|
|
Tell us why that is please.
|
|
|
|
|
Cornelius Henning wrote: Windows 10 does not have the vulnerability that is exploited by that particular virus
I'm gonna have to call you out on this, not for the sake of telling you you're wrong, but for the sake of others who might read this claim and think they're inherently protected.
There was an SMB patch for Windows 10 that first came out in March that took care of this problem. The Creators Update for Windows 10 that came out in March (which brings its build number to 1703) was already patched out of the gate so it was never vulnerable, but if you are on 1607, 1511 or 1507 and haven't installed any of the cumulative updates that predate that, that machine is vulnerable.
See the table here. Notice the section on Windows 10.
Also see this, which describes a couple of methods to verify whether a machine is properly patched or not. Notice the sections that cover Windows 10 TH1 and 2 ("Threshold" = 1507 and 1511) and RS1 ("Redstone" = 1607).
|
|
|
|
|
It's a complicated one...
Just because it's free, doesn't mean it's good: in the last century you could get free wine if you went along to a time share meeting. That didn't mean it was a good idea to go at all!
Win 10 splits opinion, probably because it's something of a mess. MS decided that they wanted the mobile market, so they produced a "mobile friendly" OS - and made it the only version available for desktops and mobiles. Trouble is, what they hit with a hammer to try and force it to be mobile hurt it as a desktop OS, and what they left to support desktop users hurt it as a mobile OS - try it on a tablet and you'll see what I mean; it's not not "together" as a mobile OS in the same way that Android (and even iOS) are (the soft keyboard alone is a PITA which eats half your screen!)
And when you compare it's schizophrenia with Win7 which was "together" as a OS it just looks worse and can be very frustrating for "normal" users. Try working with the Settings app and you'll soon find yourself back at Control Panel!
Don't get me wrong: I'm using it, both desktop and on the WookieTab. But as a desktop OS user experience, Win 7 was better. And as a mobile OS, it's far, far short of Android in many ways.
What they should have done is taken a deep breath and designed a new OS for mobile, without all the legacy support they have to have in desktop. It might even have got them significant mobile sales...
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
You do raise some good points, thanks!
However, I believe the "ugliness" stems from Microsoft's own guidelines for the visual appearance of productivity apps. Their guidelines make for some very bland and uninteresting users' interfaces. Personally, I do think they take the UI guidelines too far, but that is not reason enough to shoot down the entire OS.
I have been using 10 for more than a year now, and on the whole I am happy with it.
Get me coffee and no one gets hurt!
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
