Best laptop for slackware?
Piet de Arcilla
there was a better one.
Rev.Dr. LoBotomy
> I was wondering about running slackware on a Compaq F700, but also if
> there was a better one.
Since the kernel is the same across all distros, it shouldn't matter
whether you are running slackware or Ubuntu or some other distro. If
Ubuntu runs on your Compaq then slackware should too.
Piet de Arcilla
wrote:
Well, but what makes linux livable is support for graphics, networking
and power management.
Rev.Dr. LoBotomy
The drivers for which are all in the linux kernel.
Piet de Arcilla
wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 15:18:39 -0800, Piet de Arcilla wrote:
> > On Nov 23, 5:11 pm, "Rev.Dr. LoBotomy" <e...@NOSEPAMdrlobotomy.net>
> > wrote:
> >> On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 12:39:18 -0800, Piet de Arcilla wrote:
> >> > I was wondering about running slackware on a Compaq F700, but also if
> >> > there was a better one.
>
> >> Since the kernel is the same across all distros, it shouldn't matter
> >> whether you are running slackware or Ubuntu or some other distro. If
> >> Ubuntu runs on your Compaq then slackware should too.
>
> > Well, but what makes linux livable is support for graphics, networking
> > and power management.
>
> The drivers for which are all in the linux kernel.
In the old days, it depended on exactly what you had compiled into the
kernel, which there was an infinite number of ways to configure, and
most newer stuff wasn't supported.
Rev.Dr. LoBotomy
You don't have to recompile kernels anymore (unless you install something
like gentoo). Most distros come with everything compiled in and use HAL
to configure everything behind the scenes. Slackware's default kernel is
called huge.s, because it has everything in it. You have the option of
recompiling the kernel afterwards to lessen it's ram footprint. But with
RAM so cheap now, it doesn't make that much difference.
Rev. 11D Meow!
<e...@NOSEPAMdrlobotomy.net> wrote:
Gee
Darn
Whiz
No Wonder People Gripe So Much About 'Windows Bloat'.
It supports damn near Every hardware device on the planet.
No Wonder Apple is so adamant about keeping its OS's hardware support
under wraps. It might make too much sense to allow EveryOne to run
it, but gardangblang those random support calls asking, "I have this
scanner made in Tibet and OS X Does Not Work With It. Please Help Me,
Steve-O."
Linux is so far behind Windows in Hardware Support, it laughs in its
own horse pucky.
ta
Rev.Dr. LoBotomy
WRONG!! Windows doesn't support anything. The hardware manufacturers
write the Windows drivers which are included with your new computer. But
if you buy Windows off the shelf you'll find that you'll have no sound
and probably a 640x480 VESA screen resolution. The hardware manufacturers
don't bother supporting linux because it's such a small market. The linux
kernel developers write the kernel modules for the hardware. The benefit
of that is that if you buy or download a recent linux distro probably all
your hardware will be supported out of the box.
Rev. 11D Meow!
<e...@NOSEPAMdrlobotomy.net> wrote:
So says the dood that doesn't actually work there. ::)))
Rev.Dr. LoBotomy
Windows bloat comes mostly from DRM.
Rev. 11D Meow!
<e...@NOSEPAMdrlobotomy.net> wrote:
uh, no
DRM consists of a few DLLs that comprise much less than several MB,
sir.
Plus, DRM is a dying breed and Eveybody knows that much.
Pick a more subtle target for your rant, sir.
Like the part where EVERY given video driver
is the most buggiest artifact of many mistakes left to conquer.
This FACT has exactly INFINITY to do
with EVERY OS DOWNFALL on
this miserable "Bob"-forsaken planet.
Zapanaz
Thunder crashed, Rev.Dr. LoBotomy laughed madly, then wrote:
>On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 15:52:49 -0800, Rev. 11D Meow! wrote:
>
>> Gee
>> Darn
>> Whiz
>>
>> No Wonder People Gripe So Much About 'Windows Bloat'. It supports damn
>> near Every hardware device on the planet.
>>
>> No Wonder Apple is so adamant about keeping its OS's hardware support
>> under wraps. It might make too much sense to allow EveryOne to run it,
>> but gardangblang those random support calls asking, "I have this scanner
>> made in Tibet and OS X Does Not Work With It. Please Help Me, Steve-O."
>>
>> Linux is so far behind Windows in Hardware Support, it laughs in its own
>> horse pucky.
>>
>> ta
>
>WRONG!! Windows doesn't support anything. The hardware manufacturers
>write the Windows drivers which are included with your new computer. But
>if you buy Windows off the shelf you'll find that you'll have no sound
>and probably a 640x480 VESA screen resolution.
I don't think drivers would have much to do with Windows bloat either,
actually. Windows drivers load dynamically or are installed. So they
wouldn't have anything to do with memory or CPU requirements I don't
think.
--
Zapanaz
International Satanic Conspiracy
Customer Support Specialist
http://joecosby.com/
There was a long silence. Then, a slightly shorter silence.
- Terry Pratchett
:: Currently listening to Gypsy Eyes, 1968, by Jimi Hendrix/The Jimi Hendrix Experience, from "Electric Ladyland"
Rev. Richard Skull
> I was wondering about running slackware on a Compaq F700, but also if
> there was a better one.
If its a good lapdance, you will have NO SLACK!
Oh! you said laptop!
Never mind!
Rev. 11D Meow!
disk space, dear head in the basket one...
iDRMRSR the Reclined Mastar
>>write the Windows drivers which are included with your new computer. But
>>if you buy Windows off the shelf you'll find that you'll have no sound
>>and probably a 640x480 VESA screen resolution. The hardware
>>manufacturers don't bother supporting linux because it's such a small
>>market. The linux kernel developers write the kernel modules for the
>>hardware. The benefit of that is that if you buy or download a recent
>>linux distro probably all your hardware will be supported out of the
>>box.
>
> So says the dood that doesn't actually work there. ::)))
Windows bloat comes mostly from DRM.
<
Oh now we're in heap big Medacin Man terratory.
First of all, when I installed Win7, it was on a PC with a diffarant video
card than it was made with. Win7 selected the right drivar and I was up in
full resolutian and color depth automatically. In fact, since I use LESS
than the full 1900 by whatevar (I prefer 1280 x 768), it supported that
right out of the box.
Windoze for YEARS has had a catalog of vendor supplied drivars and a search
engane that downloads and installs them automagically. When I say YEARS, I
mean a decade or so. Evan shit like USB HDTV devices and stuff.
Things Linux still to this day can't get right. I haven't yet got a Linux
distributian that allowed me to select 1280x768 without editing a conf file
someplace, yet Windoze has done so since 2001 on a numbar of diffarant
monitors I've had here.
Linux is SAD SAD SAD when it comes to things common in the Windows world,
like MIDI support on your soundcard, 7.1 audio on your soundcard, Wifi on a
Dell laptop, Intel built in graphics, touchpads, and so on. You know,
anything TRICKY THAT SOMEONE MIGHT LIKE TO USE ONCE IN A WHILE.
And I don't think any of the "bloat" comes from DRM whatsoevar. There's DRM
built into any device that comes with an HDMI plug any moar. A few digital
signatures here and there and a handshake with Mircosoft ovar an internet
connection does not equal bloat.
Get real.
The oanly thing using Linux does is make your penis appear largar to peopal
whose persanal lives are comparabal in circumstance to Doc Martian. Oh, and
saving you about $99 a copy, which you will pay back ovar and ovar again
with your precias time getting things to work.
[*]
-----
Rev. 11D Meow!
HDMI has Exactly Zero to do with this DRM crappola topic.
HDCP is what you are referring to.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HDCP
HDMI is about connecting the shit and nothing more.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HDMI
Rev.Dr. LoBotomy
> Windoze for YEARS has had a catalog of vendor supplied drivars and a
> search engane that downloads and installs them automagically. When I
> say YEARS, I mean a decade or so. Evan shit like USB HDTV devices and
> stuff.
Most computers come with a restore cd that includes the drivers. I owned
a Dell Inspiron that I got only about 5 years ago that came with the
windows install cd without drivers and the drivers on separate disks. I
attempted to restore windows on that machine once and *nothing* worked
right until I installed the drivers manually, including the wired network
device. That's the last windows machine I've owned.
Piet de Arcilla
<idrm...@myspace.com> wrote:
> The oanly thing using Linux does is make your penis appear largar to peopal
> whose persanal lives are comparabal in circumstance to Doc Martian. Oh, and
> saving you about $99 a copy, which you will pay back ovar and ovar again
> with your precias time getting things to work.
Windows doesn't come with _anything_ out of the box. For instance,
where's the bash shell? How do you extract a .bz2 file? What about
a .tar? How about perl?
iDRMRSR the Reclined Mastar
a Dell Inspiron that I got only about 5 years ago that came with the
windows install cd without drivers and the drivers on separate disks. I
attempted to restore windows on that machine once and *nothing* worked
right until I installed the drivers manually, including the wired network
device. That's the last windows machine I've owned.
<<
YES but you had the drivars in the first place! Putting Linux on a PC is
kinda like restoring Windoze WITHOUT having Dell supplied drivar disks.
And what were you doing restoring Windoze in the first place? I suppose you
fell for the old saw about Windoze "crudding itself up" as it runs or
something. "A fresh Windoze install just speeds evarything up!". Yeah,
like that COLON CLEANAR they advertise on the radio.
Oh well. I'll nevar convince you, but once a tinkar, always a tinkar.
Evary Linux distributian I've installed so far has made me LOSE the use of
something or othar where Windoze nevar failed me.
[*]
-----
Rev.Dr. LoBotomy
> YES but you had the drivars in the first place! Putting Linux on a PC
> is kinda like restoring Windoze WITHOUT having Dell supplied drivar
> disks.
Of course my original point was in answer to Meow's statement that
Windows bloat was because of drivers. I was restoring windows to a
separate partition after installing Linux for the first time. Windows
btw, had to be on the first partition. Linux doesn't care what partition
it's on.
Come On!! What more've you got!!! BRING IT ON!!!
iDRMRSR the Reclined Mastar
where's the bash shell? How do you extract a .bz2 file? What about
a .tar? How about perl?
YOU FORGET (unless you were kidding me). No Windoze usar hardly evar uses
any of that old-fashianed shit in the first place.
I can't think of the last time I evar needed a .bat file, or to write a
program in Perl to edit some text or something.
Honest. The closest I evar came to that was when I decided to rip my CD
collectian to MP3 for my Zune. I used MP3TAG because I wanted the track and
artist and song names in the file name of the MP3's. It looked at the tags
and named them for me. What othar peopal seem to need Perl for is built in
to the apps.
We don't need no steekeeng chron jobs or background servaces, nor do we need
to compile anything and manage libraries and shit like that. Unless we are
developars, and there's few of them by comparison to evarybody else.
[*]
-----
Rev. 11D Meow!
<e...@NOSEPAMdrlobotomy.net> wrote:
er, uh, that is what you get for buying from Dell, the only PC
maufacturer worse than Gateway and eMachine.
Rev. 11D Meow!
<e...@NOSEPAMdrlobotomy.net> wrote:
uh, no, again, sir.
Your Restore CD is the cause of the 'forced' reinstall to the first
primary partition.
I am running XP on both drive C: (for the safety, which I have yet to
need in well over four years running since my last bogus need to
reinstall) while the installation I am in now is on drive letter J:.
Del Taco makes a far superior OS
than Linux will ever dream of becoming.
/mnt/scum
Rev. 11D Meow!
Microsoft: the only software industrial suicide mission.
Zapanaz
Thunder crashed, Piet de Arcilla laughed madly, then wrote:
>On Nov 23, 8:48�pm, "iDRMRSR the Reclined Mastar"
><idrm...@myspace.com> wrote:
>> The oanly thing using Linux does is make your penis appear largar to peopal
>> whose persanal lives are comparabal in circumstance to Doc Martian. �Oh, and
>> saving you about $99 a copy, which you will pay back ovar and ovar again
>> with your precias time getting things to work.
>
>Windows doesn't come with _anything_ out of the box. For instance,
>where's the bash shell?
Any OS that expects you to use one of them new-fangled "monitor" TV
things instead of a good old fashioned teletype is just too uppitty
for its own good.
>How do you extract a .bz2 file? What about
>a .tar?
You know I think as of XP or Vista, .zip files are handled
automatically by the OS, it treats them as directories.
Given that, I don't see a lot of point to tarballs. I always kind of
hated the whole tarball approach, of having one layer which is just
the files, and another which wraps that.
>How about perl?
I'm not sure if I see having a bunch of interpreted scripting
languages as huge bragging rights.
What do you use them for?
1. Perl was invented so that admins could do things like swap and
parse server logs without having to program it in C. And it's good
for that kind of thing.
And for a lot of little utility stuff. But what is most of that?
Things the OS doesn't provide.
Now it is nice having a language that handles low-intensity tasks that
you can design yourself, instead of looking for a commercial
application just to do one simple thing, or expecting it from the OS.
As a matter of fact in my sig where it says what song I'm listening
to, I did that using perl to talk to iTunes.
Which is something I do think Perl and Python and so on are good for,
2. Writing your own software.
But it's basically software that nobody but you, or somebody else with
the interpreter, can run.
So OK, that's nice.
But I have a hard time seeing a lack of that as "nothing out of the
box". It's a pretty specialized niche.
--
Zapanaz
International Satanic Conspiracy
Customer Support Specialist
http://joecosby.com/
after a few drinks, when you feel all saturnine, your mind brings up
strange thoughts
- Rienk Doetjes
:: Currently listening to Leap Frog , 1945, by Les Brown, from "Swing, Swing, Swing"
Rev. 11D Meow!
>On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 19:33:35 -0800, Rev. 11D Meow! <Ji...@Crack.corn>
>wrote:
>Let me see you install Windows to an extended partition - I bet you
>cannot.
>
Why would you need to do that?
That's just silly.
Rev. 11D Meow!
>On 24 Nov 2009 02:53:25 GMT, "Rev.Dr. LoBotomy"
>This.
>
>Admittedly, only once did I have to install an non-OEM Windows OS and
>it did not look on the net for drivers because it could not - no
>drivers for the modem!
>
And you popped that driver floppy that came with the modem right in
there to achieve instant joy.
Rev. 11D Meow!
>On 24 Nov 2009 02:53:25 GMT, "Rev.Dr. LoBotomy"
><e...@NOSEPAMdrlobotomy.net> wrote:
>
>This.
>
>Admittedly, only once did I have to install an non-OEM Windows OS and
>it did not look on the net for drivers because it could not - no
>drivers for the modem!
>
And besides, modems don't need drivers. Their inf is just a list of
AT commands. Unless it is one of those lame-ass software modems,
which nobody in their right mind would purchase, ever.
Rev.Dr. LoBotomy
> On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 09:27:51 -0800, Rev. 11D Meow! <Ji...@Crack.corn>
> Here's your cone of shame.
He's right. Why install windows anywhere? It's just silly.
iDRMRSR the Reclined Mastar
I agree with this statemant, but not its intent.
Nobody should go around installing operating systams on bare metal, or ovar
the top of working PC's, unless they are incurabal geeks.
Get it pre-installed, don't fuck with it, and don't fuck it up, and it'll
last a LONG TIME.
BTW, somebody was saying that Windoze had native support for .zip files
"oanly starting with XP". WELL XP CAME OUT IN 2001. That's EIGHT FUCKING
YEARS NOW.
In 2001, Linux could barely make a PC poot on custam built hardware. There
was no UBUNTU.
Windoze usars have been enjoying things Linux peopal think are not there now
for ALMOAST A DECADE. Linux peopal are like those Japanese soldiars living
in trees on some isolated Pacific Isle. They think WWII is still going on.
But if they climbed out of their trees, they'd realize they could have been
getting sucked off in sushi places for all those years they stayed in their
tree defending The Emporar.
Fucking fundamentalists.
[*]
-----
Rev. 11D Meow!
<e...@NOSEPAMdrlobotomy.net> wrote:
zzzzzzzzzzzing! ::)))
good one, sir
Rev. 11D Meow!
>On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 09:27:51 -0800, Rev. 11D Meow! <Ji...@Crack.corn>
>Here's your cone of shame.
>
When dealing with partitions, it helps to plan ahead,
and be smarter than a box of rocks, sir.
Rev.Dr. LoBotomy
How about if your hard drive shits the bed? That's especially a problem
if the windows restore is on a partition on the main hard drive.
But I'm not trying to convince people who don't want to know much about
their computer that they should use linux. They probably shouldn't. I'm
not trying to be a linux fundamentalist. Okay, you asked for it. THIS IS
MY STORY!:
My first computer was a Timex/Sinclair 2000 with 2000 bytes (not Mb or
even Kb) of memory, that included ROM. My second machine was a Commodore
64. I loved that machine. I learned assembly language for it, which is a
lot simpler than assembler for modern day microprocessors, and wrote my
assembler program in basic. If you were willing to do a little reading
you had complete control over your machine. Then I got my first 8086. It
was an IBM clone sold by Radio Shack. I was a bit upset that assembly
language for it was quite a bit different and the memory setup was more
confusing. But I mastered DOS and still enjoyed enough mastery of the
machine that I found it fun. Then came windows 3.1. I stayed away from it
as long as I could but eventually so many applications were written only
for windows that I had to finally get a 386 machine that would run it. I
hated windows 3.1. I tried OS/2 out, but there were so few native OS/2
apps out there that I just used it to run windows apps, which it did, but
not as well as windows. I had great hopes for Windows 95. Finally, a 32
bit operating system with real multitasking. But it ran slower than shit
on my 386, so I upgraded to a Pentium. It ran better, but would crash
regularly. And the control over the machine was restricted even more. It
had this cryptic thing called the "registry". It might be possible to use
the registry to configure windows differently than the vanilla flavor,
but you *really* had better know what you were doing or you'd bring the
whole system down. It was about this time that I first heard of linux. I
purchased a copy of Red Hat 4.1, but I couldn't get it to recognize my
non-atapi cdrom which I had installed myself. It ran off a sound blaster
sound card.
I then bought one of the first i-macs. It was a turquoise one. But this
was pre-MacOSX. It ran MacOS 8, which was flaky as hell. So I reluctantly
went back to the PC and Windows. I learned how to pirate software off the
internet so that I didn't have to pay. I owned a floppy disk copier that
would copy copy-protected disks, so I was able to duplicate all the
proprietary software that came on floppy disk and give them out to
friends. It gave me the feeling that I had more control, and that I
actually *owned* what I paid for.
Then I bought a book, Red Hat 9 for Dummies, with an installation cd in
the back. It installed perfectly on my first try. It took me a while to
figure linux out, I used online forums and search engines a lot but after
a while, I knew what I was doing. Here was the OS that I had been looking
for since the days of my Commodore 64. Not only did you have access to
everything, you were encouraged to fiddle with anything and everything
and if you came up with anything useful to share it with the community.
Six months later I got rid of the Windows partition, and haven't looked
back. Yes, I run across occasional hardware problems if I buy a new
machine. It sometimes takes up to 6 months for the kernel developers to
catch up to new hardware. But I've got everything working on my 2 laptops
and one desktop machine. They all run linux. I've got over 20000
applications in repositories free to try out and experiment with,
including the Gimp, which is as powerful as PhotoShop. Audacity, a sound
editing software that would cost hundreds of dollars if it were
proprietary. Rose Garden, music software, the proprietary analogs of
which cost into the thousands of dollars.
All of this is free. The worst part of the switching process (from
Windows to Linux) was to find native Linux replacements for the Windows
software the I was used to using. For certain types of niche software
that could be difficult. But Wine is getting better and better.
But each to his own. I've no interest in converting Windows users unless
they really hate Windows and are actively looking for something to
replace it.
iDRMRSR the Reclined Mastar
they really hate Windows and are actively looking for something to
replace it.
Oh good.
Hay, this could be a good idea for a dull Tuesday. Here's my computar
history:
1967 Univac 1107 mainframe, Algol, Fortran. PDP-10 Fortran/Assemblar
1968 Univac 1108 mainframe, Algol, Fortran, Assemblar
1969 GE 415 mainframe, 4 tape drives, no disk, 32KB mem total, COBOL
1970 Univac 1108 mainframe, COBOL, 12 tape drives, One FASTRAND drum
1971 Burroughs 1800 series midframe, COBOL, RPG
1978 IBM 370, forget which one, MVS OS, COBOL, Assemblar
1981 IBM 3081 mainframe, COBOL, ASSEMBLAR
1986 IBM 3033 mainframe, COBOL, ASSEMBLAR, IBM DB2 (SQL) database!
1987 Wang VS 100 midframe, office automatian/word processing
1991 IBM 3090 mainframe, COBOL, ASSEMBLAR, PS/2 Quickbasic
1993 Windoze 3.1, Powarbuildar, moastly Pentiams
1994 Yggdrasil Linux (blech) evan got the X windows to sort of work
1996 Windoze 95, Powarbuildar, Netscape oanly browsar allowed
1998 Finally got IE 4.0 approved; Lotus Notes replaced Wang
2002 Finally converted to Windoze XP.
2004 Decembar 31, I quit my job and slacked off for "Bob".
I oanly had to Googal a coupal of times to refresh my memory on that!
[*]
-----
Rev.Dr. LoBotomy
I used to work with a guy who was a programmer on mainframes. He knew a
lot about unix but wasn't interested in home computing because computers
were just a job for him. He got laid off after 25 years as a programmer,
became a postal worker for 5 years and retired.
Zapanaz
Thunder crashed, IMBJR laughed madly, then wrote:
>WinBloat is usually because they are trying to support legacy h/w and
>s/w.
>
Personally I sincerely think they just keep increasing the footprint
in order to sell more machines.
I mean when machines sell, Windows sells. I really do think they have
a happy wink agreement with the OEMs for it.
--
Zapanaz
International Satanic Conspiracy
Customer Support Specialist
http://joecosby.com/
>Say, what happened to all that nerve gas, anyway?
We TOOK it, for our NERVES, of course!
:: Currently listening to It's My Life, 1965, by Eric Burdon/The Animals, from "Restrospective (Hybrid SACD)"
Zapanaz
Thunder crashed, Rev.Dr. LoBotomy laughed madly, then wrote:
>Audacity, a sound
>editing software that would cost hundreds of dollars if it were
>proprietary.
I'm sorry, I have to throw a flag on the field for that one.
I have used some pretty nice audio editing software, and Audacity is
passable, but it is pretty basic.
I can see how you could do record-from-sound-card and some sound
splicing with it. In fact I think Ferdinande LeMur, who does audio
for Hour of Slacks, uses it. But as far as features there is very
very little there.
--
Zapanaz
International Satanic Conspiracy
Customer Support Specialist
http://joecosby.com/
Life in Lubbock, Texas, taught me two things: One is that God loves you and you're going to burn in hell.
The other is that sex is the most awful, filthy thing on earth and you should save it for someone you love.
- Butch Hancock
:: Currently listening to Billie's Bounce, 1947, by Charlie Parker, from "Now's the Time"
iDRMRSR the Reclined Mastar
>editing software that would cost hundreds of dollars if it were
>proprietary.
I'm sorry, I have to throw a flag on the field for that one.
I have used some pretty nice audio editing software, and Audacity is
passable, but it is pretty basic.
I can see how you could do record-from-sound-card and some sound
splicing with it. In fact I think Ferdinande LeMur, who does audio
for Hour of Slacks, uses it. But as far as features there is very
very little there.
<<
Right there, Zapanaz, is an illustratian of the diffarance between Linux
Lovars and you and me! They are so perversely satisfied WITH SO LITTAL!
They'll happaly accept any piece of shit cobbaled togethar and devote
themselves to the non-intuative intarface with PASSIAN. They just won't pay
any MUNNIE for anything. No mattar how much complicatian and agony that
might save them.
Persanally, I've used a hunk of SHAREWARE called Cooledit that cost me $25
about sevan or eight years ago, to do all my audio collage stuff. It's got
a whole sound systam built in someplace, fourier transform filtars, reverb,
envalope, the whole nine yards. It still runs undar Win7, evan though it's
been bought out and re-released by three companies that have since gone
undar.
I tried Audacity once on Ubuntu and all it did was HISS at me. Honest.
Wouldn't play back a .wav or anything.
I'D PAY HUNDREDS OF DOLLARS FOR THAT!
[*]
-----
Rev.Dr. LoBotomy
Uncle! You're right. I just don't know what I'm talking about...
Rev. 11D Meow!
<idr...@myspace.com> wrote:
>
>Persanally, I've used a hunk of SHAREWARE called Cooledit that cost me $25
>about sevan or eight years ago, to do all my audio collage stuff. It's got
>a whole sound systam built in someplace, fourier transform filtars, reverb,
>envalope, the whole nine yards. It still runs undar Win7, evan though it's
>been bought out and re-released by three companies that have since gone
>undar.
>
Cool Edit Pro was bought by Adobe and is now called Audition.
iDRMRSR the Reclined Mastar
Rev.Dr. LoBotomy
> http://cdn-www.cracked.com/articleimages/wong/computer.jpg
>
> [*]
> -----
I think I know her.
Piet de Arcilla
> Piet de Arcilla hunched over a computer, typing feverishly;
> Thunder crashed, Piet de Arcilla laughed madly, then wrote:
>
> >On Nov 23, 8:48 pm, "iDRMRSR the Reclined Mastar"
> ><idrm...@myspace.com> wrote:
> >> The oanly thing using Linux does is make your penis appear largar to peopal
> >> whose persanal lives are comparabal in circumstance to Doc Martian. Oh, and
> >> saving you about $99 a copy, which you will pay back ovar and ovar again
> >> with your precias time getting things to work.
>
> >Windows doesn't come with _anything_ out of the box. For instance,
> >where's the bash shell?
>
> Any OS that expects you to use one of them new-fangled "monitor" TV
> things instead of a good old fashioned teletype is just too uppitty
> for its own good.
>
> >How do you extract a .bz2 file? What about
> >a .tar?
>
> You know I think as of XP or Vista, .zip files are handled
> automatically by the OS, it treats them as directories.
>
> Given that, I don't see a lot of point to tarballs. I always kind of
> hated the whole tarball approach, of having one layer which is just
> the files, and another which wraps that.
>
> >How about perl?
>
> I'm not sure if I see having a bunch of interpreted scripting
> languages as huge bragging rights.
>
> What do you use them for?
It starts with a 'p'.
Rev.Dr. LoBotomy
> On 25 Nov 2009 02:20:50 GMT, "Rev.Dr. LoBotomy"
> <e...@NOSEPAMdrlobotomy.net> wrote:
>
>>Uncle! You're right. I just don't know what I'm talking about...
>
> Hey, don't wuss out on these propriety SNOBS.
But they're so... relentless, they're.. they're... ffffanatics,
ffffundamentalists.