On Tue, 26 Jul 2005 02:02:54 EDT, Ed Finnell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Adieu...
_http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7652606/_ (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7652606/)
Ed,
While it's very big of you to post evidence that proves my point - we both
stated we would drop this thread. If you still desire to
Ed Gould wrote:
On Jul 24, 2005, at 3:11 PM, Ed Finnell wrote:
In a message dated 7/24/2005 1:57:25 P.M. Central Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
What I don't understand is how, on a mailing list where we are all
ostensibly OS experts, some can be so oblivious to the basic facts
In a message dated 7/24/2005 10:29:03 P.M. Central Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
For everyone's sake, why don't you refrain from making authoritative
statements when you don't know the subject matter. Also, if someone
suggests to you the possibility that things may not work the
Agree. We have wandered too far off. Time to end the thread. *NOW*
(Remember Darren's posting).
No last words, nothing. End.
Hal
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of R.S.
Sent: Monday, July 25, 2005 4:36 AM
To:
On 25-Jul-2005, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Scott Rowe) wrote:
Don't think we'll see many converts unless they can offer a gaming
option, but the gamers are far out in front(as usual). The high
end games now run under DOS and manage the graphics and sound
themselves.
It seem rather strange to me
In a message dated 7/25/2005 10:36:12 A.M. Central Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
It seem rather strange to me that you would omit the statement that started
this whole issue.
If I'd said PC-CD instead of DOS I'd be more aligned with the
EA catalog. Other than that I believe
On Mon, 25 Jul 2005 14:00:45 EDT, Ed Finnell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If I'd said PC-CD instead of DOS I'd be more aligned with the
EA catalog.
...but the second part of the sentence would still have been absolutely
wrong.Of course, PC-CD really just means WinXP, so I guess you're
finally
On Mon, 25 Jul 2005 11:21:54 -0500, Hal Merritt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Agree. We have wandered too far off. Time to end the thread. *NOW*
(Remember Darren's posting).
No last words, nothing. End.
My apologies. I use the digest, and I had used the online search to find
Ed's replies by
Howard,
Welcome to your local Custom's Checkpoint. I believe that a few countries
have been using this technology to spot criminals and terrorists for a few
years now.
Ron
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Howard Brazee
On Sat, 23 Jul 2005 13:11:08 EDT, Ed Finnell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't understand. Most games are written for the 128bit chipsets
in Playstation, Nintendo and X-Box. They have to be tinkered to
run on XP. I've got a box full of 3.5 diskettes that all run under DOS
compliments of various
On Jul 24, 2005, at 3:11 PM, Ed Finnell wrote:
In a message dated 7/24/2005 1:57:25 P.M. Central Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
What I don't understand is how, on a mailing list where we are all
ostensibly OS experts, some can be so oblivious to the basic facts
about a
platform
Ed Gould wrote:
I have seen employers deny education for non MF related education. Yes
I know educate yourself hmmm.. maybe SHARE should offer a session or two?
A session or two?? What are you suggesting here?? Why would you advocate
SHARE cut its non-mainframe agenda back to only two
In a message dated 7/24/2005 3:45:02 P.M. Central Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Huh? Just what does any of that have to do with anything we were talking
about?
I don't know. Whatever misconceptions I have sure won't be changed
by your attitude. Period end. What I was
On Jul 24, 2005, at 5:24 PM, Edward E. Jaffe wrote:
Ed Gould wrote:
I have seen employers deny education for non MF related education.
Yes I know educate yourself hmmm.. maybe SHARE should offer a session
or two?
A session or two?? What are you suggesting here?? Why would you
advocate
Ed Jaffe's point was subtle, but on point. I would estimate that
SHARE's non mainframe content is close to 40 or even 50% these days.
Anyway, a lot more than one or two sessions.
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Ed Gould
On Sun, 24 Jul 2005 22:36:27 EDT, Ed Finnell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't know. Whatever misconceptions I have sure won't be changed
by your attitude. Period end.
OK, I guess I do have a bit of an attitude by now...
I started off trying to inform you how far from reality your conceptions
On Sun, 24 Jul 2005 15:11:04 EDT, Bill Fairchild [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't play games on any kind of computer. I am a computer professional, I
work on z/OS products, I use a PC as a tool to help me do my work, and I
gave up games 20+ years ago. I guess I am also a grumpy old man.
I
On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 13:38:21 EDT, Ed Finnell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Guess the argument is the chipset is so robust, don't want the
bloat of XP interfering with splaterring of aliens or monsters
or police officers and hearing the lamentations of the vanquished.
Who's argument? Who would make
In a message dated 7/23/2005 11:28:50 A.M. Central Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
A developer would never be able to complete a single product using that
methodology. The target, both in terms of hardware technology and gaming
standards, moves faster than you could write the
Leonard Woren wrote:
[1] I discovered that OS/2 was dead when one of my SCSI HDs failed
and a friend suggested Forget SCSI, just get a big IDE disk to
replace all your SCSI disks. Turns out that OS/2 can't be installed
on IDE disks 4 GB. And don't bother to tell me about alternate
drivers
On Wed, 20 Jul 2005 13:35:22 -0600, Paul Gilmartin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Can't the game install a usermod, if that's what the gamer consents
to? Does XP allow viruses? They thrive nonetheless.
What? A usermod to allow the program to reboot the system under a
different operating system,
In a message dated 7/21/2005 10:15:38 A.M. Central Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Ed: I took a look over at Alienware and didn't see options for DOS or NONE,
so I'm interested in how you got there. I haven't seen a PC sold with DOS
for several years, but NONE can be found as an
On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 12:24:52 EDT, Ed Finnell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't know. This is pretty typical for Gamer Customizations.
_http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/searchtools/configdetails.asp?Base=12
72096_
In a message dated 7/21/2005 12:00:41 P.M. Central Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
current commercial PC game software, the additional development effort
required to replicate all of the graphic/sound, etc functions of WinXP would
be astronomical.
Guess the argument is the
On Tue, Jul 19, 2005 at 06:43:32PM -0300, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) wrote:
But the Workplace Shell was an interesting hack,
Yes! I'd love to see an equivalent in Linux.
My recollection and understanding is (was?) that when most people ask
for IBM to open-source OS/2, it's the WPS that they
In [EMAIL PROTECTED], on 07/21/2005
at 11:31 AM, Leonard Woren [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
My recollection and understanding is (was?) that when most people ask
for IBM to open-source OS/2, it's the WPS that they want in order to
port just that to Linux. If WPS gets ported to Linux, why would
On Tue, 19 Jul 2005 09:55:40 EDT, Ed Finnell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Don't think we'll see many converts unless they can offer a gaming
option, but the gamers are far out in front(as usual). The high
end games now run under DOS and manage the graphics and sound
themselves.
What high end games
In a message dated 7/20/2005 12:21:27 P.M. Central Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
What high end games are you referring to here? The games written 10 years
ago? I doubt they would qualify as high end today. AFAIK, all current PC
I don't know, I'm not a high-end gamer. Was
In a recent note, Ed Finnell said:
Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2005 15:08:23 EDT
In a message dated 7/20/2005 12:21:27 P.M. Central Standard Time,
[log in to unmask] writes:
What high end games are you referring to here? The games written 10 years
ago? I doubt they would qualify as
In a recent note, Ed Finnell said:
Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2005 15:08:23 EDT
In a message dated 7/20/2005 12:21:27 P.M. Central Standard Time,
[log in to unmask] writes:
What high end games are you referring to here? The games written 10 years
ago? I doubt they would qualify as
Paul Gilmartin wrote:
[snip]
o How many Linucians would be impelled, even by open source, to
convert to OS/2?
Linucians? Wow, that's so much more erudite than Linux-heads. g
Kind regards,
-Steve Comstock
--
For
In a message dated 7/18/2005 10:57:43 P.M. Central Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
o IBM might have legal entanglements with contractors (perhaps even
with Microsoft?) that preclude redistributing OS/2 source code.
That would be a formidable obstacle. Guess I was thinking more
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Steve Comstock
Sent: Tuesday, July 19, 2005 8:51 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: The clamor begins for IBM to give up the code for OS/2
Paul Gilmartin wrote:
[snip]
On Mon, 2005-07-18 at 22:07 -0500, Ed Gould wrote:
Plus if they did that might make LINUX less interesting especially if
it really makes inroads into UNIX land.
Only insofar as it adds another free competitor to the OS landscape.
OS/2 and *nix aren't so alike.
--
David Andrews
A. Duda and
On Mon, 2005-07-18 at 22:57 -0500, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
o IBM might have legal entanglements with contractors
I'm thinking that IBM might have an entanglement with Serenity, which
remarkets and enhances OS/2 as eComStation. See:
http://www.ecomstation.com/
Also: the Windows code would
http://ars.userfriendly.org/cartoons/?id=20050718
-teD
In God we Trust!
All others bring data!
-- W. Edwards Deming
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the
On Jul 19, 2005, at 9:48 AM, David Andrews wrote:
On Mon, 2005-07-18 at 22:57 -0500, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
o IBM might have legal entanglements with contractors
I'm thinking that IBM might have an entanglement with Serenity, which
remarkets and enhances OS/2 as eComStation. See:
Brad Wardell! Stardock! Galactic Civilizations! Woohoo!
Sorry. Got a little carried away there.
Jon
snip
And speaking of Stardock, Brad Wardell has an interesting retrospective
on the rise-and-fall of his OS/2 business. There's even some advice
that can be taken to heart by some of us in
In [EMAIL PROTECTED], on 07/19/2005
at 10:48 AM, David Andrews [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Also: the Windows code would likely have to be stripped out.
Which Windows code? The for Windows version, which didn't include[1]
any windoze code, or the full function version, which did. FWIW, I've
never
In [EMAIL PROTECTED], on 07/18/2005
at 10:07 PM, Ed Gould [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Plus if they did that might make LINUX less interesting especially if
it really makes inroads into UNIX land.
More likely someone would port the interesting stuff to Linux.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz,
http://news.com.com/2061-10809_3-5792778.html?
part=rsstag=5792778subj=news
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the
On Jul 18, 2005, at 9:25 PM, Ed Finnell wrote:
In a message dated 7/18/2005 8:27:13 P.M. Central Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
http://news.com.com/2061-10809_3-5792778.html?
part=rsstag=5792778subj=news
They can clamor 'til they're blue in the face, ain't gonna happen.
Too
On Mon, 18 Jul 2005 22:25:16 EDT, Ed Finnell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In a message dated 7/18/2005 8:27:13 P.M. Central Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
http://news.com.com/2061-10809_3-5792778.html?part=rsstag=5792778subj=news
(wrap repaired -- gil)
They can clamor 'til they're blue
43 matches
Mail list logo
