Windows 10

Windows 98 was fine as I recall.

It did have memory leaks, and crashed a lot. On the other hand, application programs could do direct i/o instructions and peek/poke.

On a sunny day (Wed, 01 Oct 2014 09:09:10 -0700) it happened John Larkin wrote in :

That is bullshit, probably writen by somebody payed by - or holding shares of BadBill Software.

Buy a book on Unix, and be done. If not you should not be using a computah.

You think Randall Munroe is being paid by Microsoft?

That's silly. Windows mostly works. I run XP and W7 on seven different computers and spend very little time on OS-related overhead. I run, and occasionally write, engineering apps, no problems. A lot of the software that I need to run only runs under Windows.

KRW is right: the OS should run apps reliably and otherwise get out of the way. This group is about electronic design, not fiddling with operating systems.

We use Linux in some realtime, no-display, embedded apps, where it makes sense. And yes, we do recompile the kernal!

On a sunny day (Wed, 01 Oct 2014 09:52:24 -0700) it happened John Larkin wrote in :

Linux works 100%.

I do not spend any time on OS related overhead. And it runs here on more than 7 Linux computahs.

So far the software I 'need' that was written for windows runs in Linux wine windows emulator. I was recently appalled by the quality of some MS windows software E design related. The problem is that nobody releases source for MS windows, so nobody can fix it. Sure there is the occasional exception, LTSpice is good, Xilinx webpack at the other end. Not that you cannot use that (the X thing) just that it uses so much time you could have used for more interesting stuf than finding the programmer's bugs and working around it.

He behaves like an irritating idiot, thats not right.

Thats is exactly what Linux does, and MS software does NOT.

Well, you started the topic 'windows 10', it seems you are the one fiddling, or gotten paranoid about fiddling with microsoft crap. I do not start topics like 'Linux XXX version', it makes no sense. You mention trying to get as many people responding to your silly (sometimes and in this case in particular) topics, as if that is the point, nobody knows if you ever solve the problems or did it the way others worked out for you, or just gave up or what,

You should learn to program a simple GUI application, it is so simple I can teach it to you in an hour, in Linux. Linux is not really that good for 'real time' as it is a multitasker. you will need additional hardware, maybe you run it on some FPGA.

Well done!

My goodness.

If I ever need to, I will. My engineering apps are "console" mode, menus but not full GUI, with optional graphic panes as needed. I've done a little Windows GUI programming and the GUI part usually takes more time than the application; that's inherent in the asynchronous click nature of GUIs.

The ZYNC chip in the center of my photo is a serious FPGA with two 600 MHz hard-core ARM processors on chip. We used Linux because that app needs to manage and play huge i/q waveform files stored on 32G SD cards, with user control over ethernet from other Linux machines. As someone once said, any computer and OS that's fast enough is "real time."

Next ZYNQ project will probably be bare-metal, no OS.

We haven't figured out how to go halfway, namely to run Linux on one ARM and bare metal on the other. So far, with critical stuff and massive FIFOing in the FPGA, we haven't had to.

Now, you're lying.

Exactly!

Except when it doesn't. Then you have to turn into a system programmer to get it to do anything. No thanks!

You're lying again. You just think of it as play.

...and, of course, that sets itself up. You're proving my point.

Because I have NO INTEREST IN FIXING *ANY* SOFTWARE. It should just work, or it goes in the bin.

You're proving my point.

Just pointing out how far gone you are.

Except when it doesn't. See above (and the cartoon).

Because that's were the tools *will* run, dummy!

Yeah, he sure seems to be bankrupt. (what a moron!)

Why? I've long lost *any* interest in programming (anything) that I once had.

Again, you prove my point.

You have none.

I don't want donut grease fingerprints on my desktop screens!

How about a theremin interface, especially for authoring hand-waving PowerPoint presentations?

On Wed, 01 Oct 2014 16:40:13 GMT, Jan Panteltje Gave us:

Idiots who use a nickname for the term "computer" should not be permitted around ANY sophisticated electronic gear of any kind, much less the computers that control them.

Wow, auto-music to go with the Auto Content Wizard. ;)

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

Sure was better than '95, though. Of course, as a contemporary of OS/2 Warp 4.0, it was pathetic.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

On Wed, 01 Oct 2014 14:01:59 -0400, snipped-for-privacy@attt.bizz Gave us:

Jeez... that is so much bullshit.

I think 95/98 were a form of madness, but they got it to work, sort of, and there wasnt much else at the time. Well, nt & linux, but both needed devel opment.

Win/lin both have their up and downsides. I so much prefer linux overall, f ar fewer problems to deal with. And re fiddling with OSes, one doesnt usual ly need to now, if one distro doesnt run out of the box just stick another disc in, its so painless. By the end of my 98 use it was taking a whole day plus to do all the patches, install all the capable apps, import FS bits f rom winME, set this set that etc etc.

Linux does still support less hardware, but its a deal I'm very grateful to make.

NT

Every PP slide should come with dramatic musical thingies.

I think you are having trouble with the concept called a "joke".

Linux and Windows usually both "work" most of the time. They have their disadvantages, and their advantages. Anyone who thinks their particular choice of OS "works 100%" is either confused, lying, or has very little experience - things go wrong sometimes, or things fail to work as expected, or it is just extraordinarily difficult to do something that should be really easy.

For most uses, either system will do a decent job - but in both cases, you need a certain amount of familiarity in order to do something more advanced, or to get the best out of the system.

So did I, but MS refused.

I merely wanted something I had /already/ paid for, but MS prevented me from installing it. - laptop's disk crashed - reinstalled XP from my CD - used magic product key on label on laptop - XP installed but wouldn't boot, with an MS screen saying blame Samsung - Samsung blamed MS (quite reasonably) - MS solution: give Samsung /another/ $100 my solution: install linux.

XP installation time including updates: >24 hours Linux installation time including updates: 0.75 hours

Oh, Linux operates with all my peripherals (printers scanners etc): Win8 won't.

Now, what was that you were saying about "I want something that [just] *works*"?