[OT] LookOUT 2007

[Gerard]

On Monday February 12, 2007 at 05:31:45 (PM) Jay Chandler wrote:

> Gerard Seibert wrote:
> > On Monday February 12, 2007 at 04:56:24 (PM) Res wrote:
> >
> >   
> >> Yeah, and what will be the requirment in the next version on winblows,
> >> a supercomputer, and thats just for basics :P
> >>     
> >
> > Are you suggesting that we all go back to using 8086 based PC's?
> >   
> No.  I'm suggesting that a modern OS shouldn't need three quarters of 
> your hardware resources just to BOOT.
> 
> > Seriously, Every few years I buy another PC. I then add the older one
> > to my network; however, that is another story. I was just waiting for
> > the new Vista to be released before I purchased a new PC. that way I can
> > get both at the same time.
> >   
> I used Vista for a week on a laptop that was purchased within the last 
> six months and branded as "Vista Ready!"  It ran like crap, the driver 
> support for the touchpad was abysmal, and it lived in virtual memory.  
> I'll run XP until I can't anymore.  After that, FreeBSD on the desktop 
> is looking more and more attractive.

It might have been nice if you had included the system specs. Anyway, I
have never been impressed with the performance of any laptop with any
OS installed. I consider them toys, although I have been forced to use
them occasionally. The size of my fingers make the use of 'touch pads'
virtually unfathomable.

I use FreeBSD on two of my machines. One is a mail server, the other a
dedicated work station. I love the OS; however, try and get 'Flash',
Java, etc all working and you are in for a workout. The FBSD forum is
filled with individuals who cannot get drivers for hardware to either
work, or just find one that is available. Most cutting edge hardware
just does not work on FBSD or other *.nix systems. It is just the nature
of the beast.
> 
> > If it weren't for MicroSoft virtually forcing hardware developers to
> > improve their offerings, we would probably still be stuck with 386's
> > and 12mb. of memory. Somebody has got to push the envelope, and
> > MicroSoft is the only OS doing it. 
> Are you seriously suggesting that their inefficient coding style is a 
> GOOD thing?  Try benchmarking any machine running Vista to the same 
> hardware platform on ANY OTHER OS you can think of.  I'd bet quite a bit 
> that Vista comes out the loser each time.  "Pushing the envelope" 
> doesn't equate to "coding for crap" in my world.

Define 'inefficient coding style'. I have seen code from FBSD and Linux
that looks like it was written by a child. Wait, it probably was written
by one.
> 
> > Besides, if I remember correctly, my first PC was an 8086 that cost approximately $2000. with everything. My last was a Dell 4550, 3.1 GHZ HT, 1024 memory and 120Gig HD. It cost
> > just $1950. Considering that my pay scale is  higher now than it was in
> > 1983, I consider that a 'good deal'.
> >
> >   
> Back then, computers were specialty items-- now, they're commodities.  
> Let's not skirt the issue too much...
> > Anyway, what ever floats you boat!
> Agreed, but MAN, Vista is crap.

-- 
Gerard