On Sun, 20 Jan 2002 03:31:46 -0400, Clarence Verge wrote: > On Sun, 20 Jan 2002 19:04:51 +0000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> Clarence Verge wrote: >>> I'll try adding Arachne to Baslinux tonite if I get a >>> chance, and report back. >> Stop! It won't work! The Linux version of Arachne was >> compiled for glibc2 (not libc5). Arachne cannot be run >> in BasicLinux until a libc5 version is released. >> Sorry to get you excited about nothing. > Bummer. > I'm beginning to get the feel for another reason why Linux isn't > mature enough (read static enough) for prime-time. Well, it IS "mature". (that's for sure) ;-) > With DOS I can take a program written in 1980 and use it now on the > latest DOS. I can also take the latest DOS application and run it on > DOS 3.3. Not 100% true. But probably about 99.9% ;-) > With Windoze and Linux neither of the above will work due to an > entirely different philosophy. Sell them something new tomorrow > AND make damn sure they have to buy something ELSE to run it ! The good thing about Linux is that you don't need to BUY anything when a change is made. All you do is D/L the new stuff..... 100% FREE. :))))) > Static isn't bad. Old isn't bad either, but I can see that after a > LONG run, a change may be an improvement. As long as it is a change > to a mature product without designed in obsolescence. > DOS is dead. Windows is only imitating life. > Linux (Unix) has been around along time, but it has cancer. > IMO, the final answer lies elsewhere. DOS is not dead. It's not even ILL. DOS is ALIVE AND WELL. There's even a 32bit version under development. (D/L the testing version at the second link in my sig) -- Glenn http://arachne.cz/ http://freedos-32.sourceforge.net/ http://www.delorie.com/listserv/mime/ http://www.angelfire.com/id/glenndoom/download.htm
