RE: [newbie] AGH!! Linux not ready for prime time (OS/2 user) OT

2000-09-09 Thread Joe Tux
http://www.linux-mag.com/online/compton_c04_01.html //-Original Message- //From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Larry //Hignight //Sent: Friday, September 01, 2000 6:52 AM //To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] //Subject: Re: [newbie] AGH!! Linux not ready for prime time (OS/2

Re: [newbie] AGH!! Linux not ready for prime time (OS/2 user) OT

2000-09-02 Thread Austin L. Denyer
serious snipping Wow, you guys either have really cheap rent or expensive ram!!! Back then (early 90s) we were paying 80ukp per megabyte. This equates to about 130usd. My rent at that time was 220ukp (about 350usd) a month for a single bedroom apartment. Even today, prices for computer

Re: [newbie] AGH!! Linux not ready for prime time (OS/2 user) OT

2000-09-01 Thread Austin L. Denyer
Well, when I tried it (which was a good few years ago now) Windoze 3.1 was king, Win95 was still a dream project called Chicago, a college student called Linus Torvalds had just started releasing a (then very basic) Minix/unix clone on an unsuspecting world, and my 486 with 8megs of

Re: [newbie] AGH!! Linux not ready for prime time (OS/2 user) OT

2000-09-01 Thread Larry Hignight
"Austin L. Denyer" wrote: serious snipping Maybe, but at what price? It cost me (at the time) the equivalent of over six week's rent just to upgrade the machine from 4mb to 8mb RAM. Having to pay another three month's worth just to get to a hardware level that would support the OS was not

Re: [newbie] AGH!! Linux not ready for prime time (OS/2 user) OT

2000-08-31 Thread Larry Hignight
"Austin L. Denyer" wrote: There never was much support for OS/2. Comparatively few applications were ever ported, and (compared to the competition at the time) was a real resource hog. To what are you comparing it, specifically? Boot time was far quicker than Windows, IIRC.