If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sendsit to Chinese server
On Wed, 12 Sep 2018 19:34:08 -0500, Ant wrote:
In alt.comp.os.windows-10 Your Name wrote: On 2018-09-12 01:46:44 +0000, Ant said: In comp.sys.mac.system SilverSlimer wrote: The original IBM PS/1 mouse comes to my mind as an absolute piece of garbage. http://liquidninja.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/ IBM_PS2_mouse.jpg I got it with the machine when I was 12 but it didn't take long before it felt sluggish and unresponsive. Of course, I didn't have the habit of cleaning the inside of a mouse back then. Haha, I remember it with IBM PS/2 models 30 and P70 PCs back then. Yeah, I didn't like them too. They were better than Apple's lame puck mice though! I remember the IBM computers back then seeming so damned cool. My uncle had a PS/2 Model 30 with a grayscale monitor and I had a lot of fun going over there to play with Deluxe Paint. All of what I drew looked great in gray, but not so much in colour on the PS/1 my dad eventually purchased. I remember how cool I felt in having a colour monitor (while they had monochrome) and a whopping 30MB of storage when they had 20MB. Hehe. I remember how cool to have Stacker (software, not its hardware) on my 30 MB HDD back then! :O To IBM's credit, the PS/2 were shockingly durable. The PS/1, not so much. But I hated its microchannel architecture (MCA) though. I was glad my IBM PS/2 model 30 didn't use MCA like my dad's 386. Wait ... IBM made the PlayStation 1 and 2?!? ;-) LOL. The forward slash is the only thing that we can use to distinguish a robut computing platform (the PS/2) from a video game system (the PS2). -- SilverSlimer FSF Contributor / EFF Member / Free speech advocate Absolute centrist, proud Catholic |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server
....
Wait ... IBM made the PlayStation 1 and 2?!? ;-) LOL. The forward slash is the only thing that we can use to distinguish a robut computing platform (the PS/2) from a video game system (the PS2). It's like OS/2 instead of OS2. -- Quote of the Week: "Number fourteen. The naughty bits of an ant." --Monty Python's Flying Circus Note: A fixed width font (Courier, Monospace, etc.) is required to see this signature correctly. /\___/\Ant(Dude) @ http://antfarm.home.dhs.org / http://antfarm.ma.cx / /\ /\ \ Please nuke ANT if replying by e-mail privately. If credit- | |o o| | ing, then please kindly use Ant nickname and URL/link. \ _ / ( ) |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sendsit to Chinese server
On Thu, 13 Sep 2018 16:57:04 -0500, Ant wrote:
... Wait ... IBM made the PlayStation 1 and 2?!? ;-) LOL. The forward slash is the only thing that we can use to distinguish a robut computing platform (the PS/2) from a video game system (the PS2). It's like OS/2 instead of OS2. I don't think anything else of significance has ever been called OS2 though so both refer to the same operating system, methinks. My exposure to OS/2 was fairly limited as I only used it on shoddy hardware and didn't do much with it but Peter Köhlmann around here in comp.os.linux.advocacy seems to have very fond memories of it despite its marketplace failure. -- SilverSlimer FSF Contributor / EFF Member / Free speech advocate Absolute centrist, proud Catholic |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server
On Thu, 13 Sep 2018 22:39:09 GMT, SilverSlimer wrote:
I don't think anything else of significance has ever been called OS2 though so both refer to the same operating system, methinks. My exposure to OS/2 was fairly limited as I only used it on shoddy hardware and didn't do much with it but Peter Khlmann around here in comp.os.linux.advocacy seems to have very fond memories of it despite its marketplace failure. I used to run a BBS system on OS/2 back when other sysops were using relatively inferior operating systems. One guy in the area ran a board on an Amiga. (and no, that one may not have been inferior) OS/2 was cool. It ran 16-bit Windows apps better than Windows did. But when Windows 95 came out and 32-bit Windows apps started appearing... I think it was the inability of OS/2 to run the 32-bit apps that may have been the end. -- -=Elden=- |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history,sends it to Chinese server
In message Elden wrote:
On Thu, 13 Sep 2018 22:39:09 GMT, SilverSlimer wrote: I don't think anything else of significance has ever been called OS2 though so both refer to the same operating system, methinks. My exposure to OS/2 was fairly limited as I only used it on shoddy hardware and didn't do much with it but Peter Köhlmann around here in comp.os.linux.advocacy seems to have very fond memories of it despite its marketplace failure. I used to run a BBS system on OS/2 back when other sysops were using relatively inferior operating systems. One guy in the area ran a board on an Amiga. (and no, that one may not have been inferior) OS/2 was cool. It ran 16-bit Windows apps better than Windows did. But when Windows 95 came out and 32-bit Windows apps started appearing... I think it was the inability of OS/2 to run the 32-bit apps that may have been the end. OS/2 was brilliant at the time, and the history of its "failure" (not a failure, more sabotage) is an interesting footnote in computer history. The ideas behind its design are the same as how various flavors of desktop Linux are still designed, and also basically how macOS (née OS X) is designed, with a command-line under the GUI After screwing over OS/2, Microsoft used a lot of those ideas for securing Windows NT, which then evolved into Windows 2000, XP, 7, and even Windows 10. (Windows 2000 was NT 5.0 and XP was NT 5.1, Vista was NT 6.0 and, confusingly, Windows 7 was NT 6.1. Windows 8 was NT 6.2 and then they reset everything with Windows 10 (NT 10.0). -- Why is it so damn hot in here, and why are we all in a handbasket? |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sendsit to Chinese server
On Fri, 14 Sep 2018 20:13:15 -0700, Elden wrote:
On Thu, 13 Sep 2018 22:39:09 GMT, SilverSlimer wrote: I don't think anything else of significance has ever been called OS2 though so both refer to the same operating system, methinks. My exposure to OS/2 was fairly limited as I only used it on shoddy hardware and didn't do much with it but Peter Köhlmann around here in comp.os.linux.advocacy seems to have very fond memories of it despite its marketplace failure. I used to run a BBS system on OS/2 back when other sysops were using relatively inferior operating systems. If I remember correctly, most BBSs I connected to back in the day (I started late in 1991 on a 2400 baud modem and Microsoft Works of all things to connect... discovered Telix a little later) seemed to use Desqview. I couldn't imagine anyone setting up a computer JUST to run a BBS though considering how expensive hardware was back then. One guy in the area ran a board on an Amiga. (and no, that one may not have been inferior) I recall connecting to an Amiga BBS at some point when I truly knew nothing about platform differences. What I remember was that they used .lzh (if I remember correctly) for compression of their downloadable programs and that the text colours were all off. OS/2 was cool. It ran 16-bit Windows apps better than Windows did. But when Windows 95 came out and 32-bit Windows apps started appearing... I think it was the inability of OS/2 to run the 32-bit apps that may have been the end. The fact that OS/2 also lacked any kind of useful software out of the box didn't help. While Windows 3.1 and 95 offered you a rudimentary word processor, calendar and Internet connectivity software, most OS/2 packages didn't even have the latter. Of course, my memory might be foggy and I welcome Peter's input on this. -- SilverSlimer FSF Contributor / EFF Member / Free speech advocate Absolute centrist, proud Catholic |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sendsit to Chinese server
On Sat, 15 Sep 2018 11:54:31 +0000, Lewis wrote:
In message Elden wrote: On Thu, 13 Sep 2018 22:39:09 GMT, SilverSlimer wrote: I don't think anything else of significance has ever been called OS2 though so both refer to the same operating system, methinks. My exposure to OS/2 was fairly limited as I only used it on shoddy hardware and didn't do much with it but Peter Köhlmann around here in comp.os.linux.advocacy seems to have very fond memories of it despite its marketplace failure. I used to run a BBS system on OS/2 back when other sysops were using relatively inferior operating systems. One guy in the area ran a board on an Amiga. (and no, that one may not have been inferior) OS/2 was cool. It ran 16-bit Windows apps better than Windows did. But when Windows 95 came out and 32-bit Windows apps started appearing... I think it was the inability of OS/2 to run the 32-bit apps that may have been the end. OS/2 was brilliant at the time, and the history of its "failure" (not a failure, more sabotage) is an interesting footnote in computer history. The ideas behind its design are the same as how various flavors of desktop Linux are still designed, and also basically how macOS (née OS X) is designed, with a command-line under the GUI After screwing over OS/2, Microsoft used a lot of those ideas for securing Windows NT, which then evolved into Windows 2000, XP, 7, and even Windows 10. (Windows 2000 was NT 5.0 and XP was NT 5.1, Vista was NT 6.0 and, confusingly, Windows 7 was NT 6.1. Windows 8 was NT 6.2 and then they reset everything with Windows 10 (NT 10.0). I kind of feel bad for IBM trusting Microsoft the way that they did. They should have known that the guys at the helm (particularly Gates) could not be trusted and that they had their own agenda. Had OS/2 become as important as IBM expected it to, they could have remained a gigantic player in the desktop computing field regardless of the fact that they lost their hold on the hardware. Instead, they lost both hardware (despite their efforts to lock it down) and software and was already irrelevant by around 1996. Does anyone else ever imagine what today's computing would have been like had their BIOS never been reverse-engineered and the third-parties never taken IBM's authority away from the PC platform? -- SilverSlimer FSF Contributor / EFF Member / Free speech advocate Absolute centrist, proud Catholic |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server
On Sat, 15 Sep 2018 16:04:01 GMT, SilverSlimer wrote:
On Sat, 15 Sep 2018 11:54:31 +0000, Lewis wrote: Does anyone else ever imagine what today's computing would have been like had their BIOS never been reverse-engineered and the third-parties never taken IBM's authority away from the PC platform? Computers would have been twice as powerful, ten thousand times larger, and so expensive that only the 5 richest kings of Europe will own them. On the flip side - when it came to computer dating - computer matches would be so perfect as to eliminate the thrill of romantic conquest. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server
In article ,
SilverSlimer wrote: My exposure to OS/2 was fairly limited as I only used it on shoddy hardware and didn't do much with it but Peter Köhlmann around here in comp.os.linux.advocacy seems to have very fond memories of it despite its marketplace failure. OS/2 — half an operating system? -- Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greed. Me. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server
On Tue, 6 Nov 2018 14:24:58 UTC, Walter Bushell
wrote: In article , SilverSlimer wrote: My exposure to OS/2 was fairly limited as I only used it on shoddy hardware and didn't do much with it but Peter K├Âhlmann around here in comp.os.linux.advocacy seems to have very fond memories of it despite its marketplace failure. OS/2 ÔÇö half an operating system? I abandoned DOS for OS/2 in the 1980s. I had to have TCP/IP to access the department computer and Netware to access the corporate computers. DOS forced me to swap out config.sy -- John Varela |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server
In article , SilverSlimer
wrote: My exposure to OS/2 was fairly limited as I only used it on shoddy hardware and didn't do much with it but Peter Köhlmann around here in comp.os.linux.advocacy seems to have very fond memories of it despite its marketplace failure. OS/2 ⤲ half an operating system? Its name derives from the PS/2 and was meant to suggest that it would work best on PS/2 devices which, I assume, IBM expected to have dominate the computer space. Looking back, the PS/2, as sturdy as it was, could not have dominated a space in which computers like the Amiga and the Atari ST could do more for a lot less money. no they couldn't. those were toys. what killed it was that microsoft forced windows everywhere, often illegally. |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sends it to Chinese server
In article , SilverSlimer
wrote: what killed it was that microsoft forced windows everywhere, often illegally. Windows was a non-factor when the PS/2 line was killed off. yes it was. The reverse engineering of the BIOS and the creation of the compatible PC did a lot more than Windows could ever hope to do. The introduction of EISA as an answer to MCA was pretty much the last nail in the coffin of the PS/2 if not OS/2. What you're suggesting is only somewhat true of OS/2 but you can't deny that Windows, while technically worse than OS/2, was more than enough for regular users and often a much more interesting product. For crying out loud, OS/2 banked on its Windows 3.1 compatibility to sell copies and had little to no software written directly for it. Why would you need OS/2 to run Windows 3.1 when you can just install Windows 3.1? in other words, windows was a factor. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sendsit to Chinese server
On 2018-11-06 9:24 a.m., Walter Bushell wrote:
In article , SilverSlimer wrote: My exposure to OS/2 was fairly limited as I only used it on shoddy hardware and didn't do much with it but Peter Köhlmann around here in comp.os.linux.advocacy seems to have very fond memories of it despite its marketplace failure. OS/2 — half an operating system? Its name derives from the PS/2 and was meant to suggest that it would work best on PS/2 devices which, I assume, IBM expected to have dominate the computer space. Looking back, the PS/2, as sturdy as it was, could not have dominated a space in which computers like the Amiga and the Atari ST could do more for a lot less money. -- SilverSlimer Proud recipient of special entitlements Fierce adversary of equal rights, improved productivity and error-reduction |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sendsit to Chinese server
On 2018-11-06 11:34 a.m., nospam wrote:
In article , SilverSlimer wrote: My exposure to OS/2 was fairly limited as I only used it on shoddy hardware and didn't do much with it but Peter Köhlmann around here in comp.os.linux.advocacy seems to have very fond memories of it despite its marketplace failure. OS/2 ⤲ half an operating system? Its name derives from the PS/2 and was meant to suggest that it would work best on PS/2 devices which, I assume, IBM expected to have dominate the computer space. Looking back, the PS/2, as sturdy as it was, could not have dominated a space in which computers like the Amiga and the Atari ST could do more for a lot less money. no they couldn't. those were toys. 1) Could you write essays and do spreadsheets on the Amiga or the Atari ST? 2) Could you edit graphics and make banners? 3) Could you play games in addition to doing useful work? They might have served as a console to many people, but both computers could still be as useful as a PS/2 was. what killed it was that microsoft forced windows everywhere, often illegally. Windows was a non-factor when the PS/2 line was killed off. The reverse engineering of the BIOS and the creation of the compatible PC did a lot more than Windows could ever hope to do. The introduction of EISA as an answer to MCA was pretty much the last nail in the coffin of the PS/2 if not OS/2. What you're suggesting is only somewhat true of OS/2 but you can't deny that Windows, while technically worse than OS/2, was more than enough for regular users and often a much more interesting product. For crying out loud, OS/2 banked on its Windows 3.1 compatibility to sell copies and had little to no software written directly for it. Why would you need OS/2 to run Windows 3.1 when you can just install Windows 3.1? -- SilverSlimer Proud recipient of special entitlements Fierce adversary of equal rights, improved productivity and error-reduction |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
No. 1 paid utility in Mac App Store steals browser history, sendsit to Chinese server
On 2018-11-06 11:55 a.m., nospam wrote:
In article , SilverSlimer wrote: what killed it was that microsoft forced windows everywhere, often illegally. Windows was a non-factor when the PS/2 line was killed off. yes it was. The reverse engineering of the BIOS and the creation of the compatible PC did a lot more than Windows could ever hope to do. The introduction of EISA as an answer to MCA was pretty much the last nail in the coffin of the PS/2 if not OS/2. What you're suggesting is only somewhat true of OS/2 but you can't deny that Windows, while technically worse than OS/2, was more than enough for regular users and often a much more interesting product. For crying out loud, OS/2 banked on its Windows 3.1 compatibility to sell copies and had little to no software written directly for it. Why would you need OS/2 to run Windows 3.1 when you can just install Windows 3.1? in other words, windows was a factor. Only on OS/2's demise, not on the PS/2's. -- SilverSlimer Proud recipient of special entitlements and fierce adversary of equal rights Minds: @silverslimer |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|