Home Messages Index
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index

Re: ZenWalk

  • Subject: Re: ZenWalk
  • From: The Ghost In The Machine <ewill@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2006 18:00:14 GMT
  • Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy
  • Organization: EarthLink Inc. -- http://www.EarthLink.net
  • References: <pan.2006.08.11.19.36.01.80099@tiscali.co.uk> <pan.2006.08.15.18.08.18.362484@gmail.com> <pan.2006.08.15.18.50.27.842559@tiscali.co.uk> <94m9r3-tta.ln1@sirius.tg00suus7038.net> <1323570.pBJthv2JPZ@schestowitz.com> <4ttbr3-ajq.ln1@sirius.tg00suus7038.net> <1971257.SDjRxCEB1Q@schestowitz.com>
  • User-agent: slrn/0.9.8.1 (Linux)
  • Xref: news.mcc.ac.uk comp.os.linux.advocacy:1142070
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Roy Schestowitz
<newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
 wrote
on Fri, 18 Aug 2006 10:53:08 +0100
<1971257.SDjRxCEB1Q@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
> __/ [ The Ghost In The Machine ] on Wednesday 16 August 2006 18:00 \__
>
>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Roy Schestowitz
>> <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>  wrote
>> on Wed, 16 Aug 2006 09:38:14 +0100
>> <1323570.pBJthv2JPZ@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
>>> __/ [ The Ghost In The Machine ] on Tuesday 15 August 2006 22:00 \__
>>>
>>>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Kier
>>>> <vallon@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>  wrote
>>>> on Tue, 15 Aug 2006 19:50:27 +0100
>>>> <pan.2006.08.15.18.50.27.842559@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
>>>>> On Tue, 15 Aug 2006 11:08:18 -0700, Kelsey Bjarnason wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Fri, 11 Aug 2006 20:36:07 +0100, Kier wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> A while back, I got my hands on my Mum's old laptop, a slow clunker of
>>>>>>> an Advent that has a 900mhz processor (Celeron), and only 128 gig RAM.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Wish I had that.  :)
>>>>>
>>>>> Bugger! I never noticed that - some clunker that would be, eh? <grin>
>>>>>
>>>> 
>>>> Depends what's on it.  Would probably run Linux reasonably well.
>>>> I'd hate to put Vista on it. :-)
>>>
>>> You can bet your ass Vista would hate that too. It's a vain O/S. *smile*
>> 
>> More like a very *fat* OS.  :-)  My Athlon might run it
>> but it would probably be like squeezing a size 8 figure
>> into a size 4 dress.  (Or squeezing a 42" derrier into 38"
>> pants, for those on my side of the gender gap.)
>
>
> It's a *fat* OS as you said. It could be either gender.
> You can take a pig, put it in a size 4 dress and take
> it out for dinner. But it's still a pig in
> a size 4 dress. And people would stare.

Aye, that they would.  And not in a good way. :-)

>
>
>> My Kayak would take one look at it and run screaming,
>> and it won't even install on my home Optiplex server --
>> no CD ROM.
>
>
> "Screaming" is an interesting word to use.

Well, all right, if you insist; my Kayak (which for the
record has an 866 MHz P III processor -- I'm not sure I
can even *find* a second one nowadays) would take one
look at it, start to run, trip over, and crawl through
molasses until it gets to a doorway and falls through to
escape the scheming clutches of the Microsoft Bog Monster.
:-)

> You can also say that Linux is
> screaming on a low-end hardware when it runs very well (responsively).

My Kayak is perfectly happy with Linux at that, and even the
ATi card isn't too bad with Nexuiz.  It won't best my Athlon
but it'll do the job for such things as Web browsing, and
even light office work.

(I originally bought it with an eye to making it a 2-processor box.  Of
course, the second processor's been a bit difficult to locate... :-/)

>
>
>> Yeah, nothing like Microsoft "innovation" driving the desktop
>> hardware industry, is there? :-)
>
>
> I don't think it's intentional. However, let's weigh some factors:
>
> 1. Microsoft has a relationship with (and thus commitment for) OEM's.
>
> 2. Microsoft has a relationship with hardware makers, including chipmakers
> who want to sell the latest and greatest processors that cost 5-10 times
> more than the low-end line.
>
> 3. Microsoft's hardware cycles are tied to software cycles. New software is
> often purchased and new shackles (e.g. further-extended formats) are tied to
> one's foot.
>
> There are more factors, but it'll take some mental digging. I usually type as
> I go along thinking. I suspect you do likewise since many of your writeups
> are ramblings that change targets and go aimlessly towards different
> conclusions, without any hypethesis in mind. I like that, by the way. It's
> surreal!

A wandering mind occasionally finds a truffle (if it
knows what a truffle is; there's a mixed-up metaphor. :-) )

I'm inclined to agree with you with the caveat that
Microsoft intentionally -- insofar as I can see, anyway --
set up a marketing/contract system that was deliberately
to their advantage, by selling their OS at a lower price
but with the requirement that all desktop boxes shipped
count towards their revenue.

Clever -- and it worked.

>
>
>> I'm not all that happy about my Athlon's performance (I
>> could probably use faster hard drives) but at least it's
>> a comfortable fit.
>
>
> It's ironic that it performs badly. I had to reassure myself that it's ironic
> by seeking the roots of the name.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Athlon#Athlon_Classic

It's mostly the hard drives.  Once the stuff gets into memory it does
very well.  And even the hard drives aren't that bad (60 GB units; I
don't remember the models offhand).

Hm...Wiki's being slow today.  Odd.

>
> ,----[ Quote ]
> | The Athlon made its debut on June 23, 1999. The name "Athlon" was chosen 
> | by AMD as short for "decathlon".
> `----


-- 
#191, ewill3@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Windows Vista.  Because it's time to refresh your hardware.  Trust us.

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index