fujidude

In that case it's all good.

Please don't be demanding of developers, lest their labor of love starts to feel more like a job; a job for which they do not demand money for.

I don't know... I thought those phrases "have legs", so long as you look at it from the perspective of "the totality of the circumstances."

Didn't they load right from the USB device itself in many cases? Maybe my recollection is jumbled.

I heard they discontinued Bob because he shot himself in the head; right there in that cheesy ass "room."

And how serious were those shortcomings? I'm betting that if folks are completely honest, they'll admit they were fairly significant. Hopefully any killer advantages it had find their way into more popular OS's.

I didn't see it either. We must all be humor challenged or something. That or, it was a "retroactive" joke; if you know what I mean.

That's a hell of a "laptop." What does something like that set a person back? Also, what kind of work do you do with it?

All of that tedious work to run an immature OS lacking in features and then using it elusively starting in '93: I officially recognize you as geek of the hardcore order! I had just become aware of Linux in 1993 and didn't try it myself until 1995 or so. And I was never willing to jump through that many hoops when I already had a working OS from MS that (mostly) worked well enough. I respect your doggedness and accomplishment in that regard. Sorry about your request not to argue about the hardware support but: I've found hardware support to be very good. I'll admit it's not as bleeding edge as Windows though. Hardware makers make drivers for Windows available when the hardware is released, so it's hard to beat that (though not always for earlier Windows which may still be in significant use). Also, in Windows world, some hardware makers seem to like to go out of their way not keep drivers up to date with new OS releases. I suppose that way if someone upgrades their OS they have to re-buy another flatbed scanner or whatever. Yeah, that would be me. However, modern Linux hardware support is still what I consider to be very good. But Macintosh... your argument is a bit skewed there. Apple controls the core and a fair amount of the periphery hardware you will be using with their OS. Hardware choices in Macintosh land are small compared to the gazillions of options in general PC territory. So yeah, when the OS and PC come bundled together, the hardware had better be well supported! So while you can say Linux has lagging HW support, you could also say that Macintosh has "lacking" hardware support. I'll agree though that when you buy a Mac, you know everything in it will work well with the OS.

As I was reading along I was going to respond, but mr_me stated things perfectly.

I first started dabbling in Linux in the late '90s. To say it was unpolished, especially in the GUI experience, is being charitable. Now, however, it is really nice. In fact, I like it better than Windows over-all.

Up... where exactly?

Yep. I wish I could remember what all the heck it was that bugged us about it. I just remember experiencing issues that 98 didn't have. It is possible that we were a little quick to get sour on it though. It's just that without being able to remember details it's hard to know.

Thanks for making it available.

On the 8-bit machines: SpartaDOS Historic milestone OSs on x86: DOS 5 It was a big leap from DOS 3 that I first learned. Windows 3.1 and in particular Windows for Workgroups 3.11 - It brought (pseudo) multitasking, integraded network functionality. Windows previous to 3.1 just wasn't quite up to my standards. Windows 95 and especially the OSR2 flavor - This was even more 32-bit friendly than win32s bolt on for 3.11 was. And it got a new fresh UI look too. Windows NT 4 - NT... a Windows actually somewhat suited for use by larger organizations. Windows 2000 - The welcome and IMHO overdue convergence of the consumer and NT versions of Windows. Windows 7 - Perhaps the best version they have ever made thus far. I say perhaps because I'm not convinced 8.x and 10 (and to me 10 is really just 8.2 anyway or 9 at the most). Linux kernel 2.6 - I feel this is the kernel where a lot of important improvements were made. Modern PCs: Windows 7 Mac OSX Linux - Some Unix snobs like to denigrate Linux as some kind of a unsophisticated hillbilly cousin twice removed, but us Linux users know better. My current favorite is Linux Mint.

We had a little nickname for that one in tech circles: Windows 98 Sh*tty Edition. Far more problems than straight 98 and way more than an OS should have. Windows 98 was decent though.

That is sad news indeed. Condolences to family and friends. I hope he did not have to suffer too much.

That's just a bit wide of a scope. Can you site something more specific? It seems to me you might be getting this from section 2.3 of the Run-time Docs (RTD)? If so then yeah, I think I see what you mean. See the following code snippet: PROC main() INT x, y, z x = 3 y = 5 z = x * y RETURN Is what you're saying the compiler is incapable of producing code for the * operand, and instead must directly use pre-fab code built into the cartridge?

Hmm that doesn't seem right at all. I'm pretty sure the available "run-time" (actually just Action! source code) covers everything and the presence of a cartridge is not required. Can you post a quick code snippet that requires the presence of the cartridge if the run-time is used? I would like to test it out.

Yeah, there aren't too many trolls in science.

Hehe; "problems." That's more appropriate than perhaps he intended.

That and software which was written but never released by the developer. I know because I have made such programs and they have not been pirated at all!

I never meant to imply you were. It was just a reaction to some of the on-going content in general. Besides that I wasn't specifically responding to you, I'm thinking more along the lines that there is feeding taking place. It is the original posting which I feel was a bit of trolling. Trolls get a kick out of poking bees nests and seeing the reaction of the bees. Now there are some bees buzzing around making noise, but they are only reacting as nature designed. Despite that, there is some worthy content in here too. And of course, this is all just my opinion. Other's may vary.

We should start a new topic; The Care and Feeding of Trolls.