Mac = do I pull this thing with the cord ? - playschool

the first computer I rember using in school was Macintosh (old machines, IIRC there were apps names "Claris Works" and "Hyper Card"), I recall that there was one PC with windows 95 on it. That was long time ago, now days, I wonder if there are any Macintosh left, I can't recall one singe time that the Mac machnies crashed.
Posted on 2003-08-07 11:49:19 by scientica

I feel that Linux is one of the best OS's on the market, and you CANNOT beat the
price.

I disagree. I tried QNX and it is far more stable, and runs Linux applications as well. I have heard that OpenBSD was much better too, but I haven't tried it.
Since you're such a big Linux fan, try this: a boot disk with Linux, and the graphical interface. Yur can't, right? Well, now go to the QNX home page and download the 1.44 megabytes demo... Graphical interface, web browser, modem dialer, media player, etc... :cool:
Posted on 2003-08-07 12:45:14 by QvasiModo
I have had a similar experience scientica. The first computer that I used was
a Mac, and all of the computers in the school were Macs except one was a
PC using 3.0. At the time I new nothing about computers, and Mac was good
for starting for me. I do feel that a PC does offer more.
Now, as far as QNX goes I really would like to give it a try someday. Sounds
nice. I did indicate the linux was "one" of the best OS's, and I do not think
that much will change that. I like anything that people, as a group, contribute
to.
I live in Canada, and if feel that a person should not have to spend four
hundred dollars plus to run a computer. It just does not seem right, and even
if a person does save the money up and purchase an OS from microsoft,
oneday they are just going to make another one and hand out he guilt trip
about spending another four hundred dollars or "just" the one hundred and
fifty for the upgrade. Some people just do not have that kind of money to
throw away on computers. It is just not right...:(
Now with linux, it does have some issues. I have to agree with that, but what-
ever version you buy you can always update and change the OS to suit your
standards. WITHOUT COST .The trouble is, I find, that there has to be at least
one person in the dwelling that is in a programming frame of mind. It really
takes some knowledge to use, but once in operation, like unix, it does not fail.
At least not in my experience. Now this could be due to the particular distribution
of linux. I personally think that SuSE is very good, but other will differ. I also have
not had any luck with RedHat, but Mandrake is good. I understand that debian is
really good as well as Slackware. Again, you really have to know something
about computers.
Usually I find that people running computer stores are not interested in linux
because it is not a cash cow like microsoft. NOT all but most.
I am not trying to offend anyone, and I hope that I have not. These are just my
experiences with the wonderful world of computers. :grin:
Posted on 2003-08-07 15:10:35 by SpEcIeS

Now, as far as QNX goes I really would like to give it a try someday. Sounds
nice. I did indicate the linux was "one" of the best OS's, and I do not think
that much will change that. I like anything that people, as a group, contribute
to.


Never mind, just trying to start a little "flame war", don't take me that seriously... :grin: It's just that I've met so many people talking wonders about Linux, just because it is not M$, that I read your post quickly and jumped right at the keyboard to reply... :o
I live in Canada, and if feel that a person should not have to spend four
hundred dollars plus to run a computer. It just does not seem right, and even
if a person does save the money up and purchase an OS from microsoft,
oneday they are just going to make another one and hand out he guilt trip
about spending another four hundred dollars or "just" the one hundred and
fifty for the upgrade. Some people just do not have that kind of money to
throw away on computers. It is just not right...:(

I totally agree with you there. I live in Argentina, and I don't know a single person actually purchasing a copy of Windows. It's not that we are disrespectful of copyright laws here, it's just that 400 dollars are around 1200 pesos here, definitely too much for a piece of software. Specially when a pirated version cost little more than two dollars :grin: You just can't afford an OS that costs almost half than your PC...
Now with linux, it does have some issues. I have to agree with that, but what-
ever version you buy you can always update and change the OS to suit your
standards. WITHOUT COST .The trouble is, I find, that there has to be at least
one person in the dwelling that is in a programming frame of mind. It really
takes some knowledge to use, but once in operation, like unix, it does not fail.
At least not in my experience. Now this could be due to the particular distribution
of linux. I personally think that SuSE is very good, but other will differ. I also have
not had any luck with RedHat, but Mandrake is good. I understand that debian is
really good as well as Slackware. Again, you really have to know something
about computers.

That's common to all OS. After all, a computer is not like a TV or a telephone, even if Microsoft tries to make it as popular an easy. Even if you use Win2K you will have to know something about computers, if you have strange hardware or if there are any problems...
Usually I find that people running computer stores are not interested in linux
because it is not a cash cow like microsoft. NOT all but most.
I am not trying to offend anyone, and I hope that I have not. These are just my
experiences with the wonderful world of computers. :grin:

You haven't offended anyone! Not me for sure! I was just showing of my favorite OS, that's all... :grin: I find we have very similar thoughts... :)
Posted on 2003-08-07 15:51:17 by QvasiModo

Since you're such a big Linux fan, try this: a boot disk with Linux, and the graphical interface. Yur can't, right? Well, now go to the QNX home page and download the 1.44 megabytes demo... Graphical interface, web browser, modem dialer, media player, etc... :cool:

Uhm, isn't QNX based on a Linux kernel? IIRC a micro-Kernel, or was it an other micro Linux distro I tried some time ago?
Posted on 2003-08-07 17:30:33 by scientica
Wow, I really enjoyed your feedback QvasiModo. :) Thanks. It is nice to know that
others feel the same way.
I have tried to download QNX to check it out, but it keeps failing. :( Not sure why,
but I will keep trying. I am always curious to try new OS's.
Posted on 2003-08-07 20:30:03 by SpEcIeS


Uhm, isn't QNX based on a Linux kernel? IIRC a micro-Kernel, or was it an other micro Linux distro I tried some time ago?

Actually not, it follows the POSIX standard, but QNX microkernel technology is quite different. It was actually not made for the PC, but for embedded computers and such (car computers, public telephones, space shuttles, etc :) ) It is a real-time OS (not quite sure of the real difference, except that it priviledges a quick to an accurate response. The result is it's a very stable OS, although I experienced some graphic glitches when the CPU load was high. I could not manage to crash it, even in extreme conditions, that would certainly kill a Windows box... :grin:
Posted on 2003-08-08 10:59:37 by QvasiModo

Wow, I really enjoyed your feedback QvasiModo. :) Thanks. It is nice to know that
others feel the same way.

You're welcome! :)
I have tried to download QNX to check it out, but it keeps failing. :( Not sure why,
but I will keep trying. I am always curious to try new OS's.

If you're trying the 1.44 demo, you should check that there are no bad sectors in the diskette. I had that problem too. Apparently, the program used to write the disk images does not warn you if that happens... :(
Posted on 2003-08-08 11:05:45 by QvasiModo
wake up horse wake up d*mn you die... oh it is
Posted on 2003-10-11 18:35:55 by devilsclaw
Untill they make a good Office for linux, windows will remain the most popular OS.
I've seen about 6 different 'Word''s for linux and none of them worked.
And all these graphic interfaces (KDE and so on) are way too buggy also.
As for QNX...
Well, QNX 4.25 is too old and not supported anymore, but it works great. Never seen it crush.
QNX6.xx is another thing. They wanted to make it more like linux, but what's the use of a linux-like OS, when I can use the the REAL linux? Yes, QNX is a RTOS, but RT linux works even better on some tests.
Posted on 2003-10-14 03:56:12 by Vaxon
I use things like abiword, openoffice and scribus... there's almost no difference from MS word and in some cases their functionality is better.

The biggest "problem" in user-attraction any of the *nixes have is the user's unwillingness to learn IMO.
Posted on 2003-10-14 05:10:53 by Hiroshimator
well, a few months ago i used to say that i don't need linux at all
i can still say that hehe

i've installed suse, it works pretty well, the staroffice sucked
i developed a windows/linux fax sender, i gotta say that linux managed it better
i had more troubles setting up the terminal in linux but there's a lot more options than in windows
finally it worked in both o.s. but better in linux
(ive done it c++, we work with it here)

well IMO, i feel more stable using windows and i feel more in control using linux with 4 consoles opened hehe (windows rules in games also)


about qnx, am i wrong or it's a micro kernel?
linux it's a monolitich one, big difference


well c u
Posted on 2003-10-14 05:41:16 by Eternal Idol Birmingham
You know when the VHS came out, Betamax was already king and had the big name of Sony behind it. I hung on to my Betamax because it was better quality, smaller tapes and SONY!! When VHS started to rule, I proclaimed to everybody that Betamax was the way. I was hanging onto a camel instead jumping onto the horse!

As you cling to Linux, just remember the lesson of the Betamax! You may ride that camel and say it is better than a horse but the important thing is having something to ride. Don't shoot the horse, it might be the only thing left around to ride one day. :grin:
Posted on 2003-10-15 01:59:07 by ArkiTek
The difference is that Linux is here to stay, and it's not locked to the x86-32....
Linux has been a head of windows in some areas (like stabillity and terminals), but when it comes to dumb-user-friendly-interfrace windows lies a head.
Posted on 2003-10-15 03:49:03 by scientica
for a developer windows is getting more and more like a donkey :/

and it won't take carrots
Posted on 2003-10-15 05:49:14 by Hiroshimator