|
Post by gwen on Feb 5, 2007 17:17:13 GMT -4
Haha it's true they didn't have the computing power to visually portray a moon landing with simulated vector graphics and raster overlays on a desktop screen. On the other hand, running an interactive game of pong on a screen takes more computing power than calculating a flight to the moon.
|
|
|
Post by Count Zero on Feb 5, 2007 22:49:16 GMT -4
Apparently one of Kepler's long-lost laws of orbits is that computing power needs increase proportional to orbital altitude. Hmmm... I wonder what software the Moon uses to stay in its orbit?
|
|
|
Post by Mr Gorsky on Feb 6, 2007 5:44:40 GMT -4
Hmmm... I wonder what software the Moon uses to stay in its orbit? Since it is still there, it clearly isn't using Windows.
|
|
|
Post by LunarOrbit on Feb 6, 2007 11:26:10 GMT -4
I wonder what software the Moon uses to stay in its orbit? If it was using OS X it would be called iMoon, the Apollo missions would have cost three times as much (although there would still be more public support for them), and it would look like this:
|
|
|
Post by Mr Gorsky on Feb 6, 2007 11:38:24 GMT -4
Well, someone has too much time on his hands ...
|
|
|
Post by JayUtah on Feb 6, 2007 12:33:02 GMT -4
I hate Windows as much as the next guy, and especially Microsoft's methods of maintaining and extending it. But I was surprised to learn that Windows 3.1 (remember that?) is still alive and kicking and actually being used in human-rated control systems.
|
|
|
Post by echnaton on Feb 6, 2007 12:43:11 GMT -4
Those were the good old days, when operating systems delivered on the pledge of improved computing. Although it was a huge gain compared to straight DOS, I only really liked W 3.1 after I installed Norton Desktop to actually make it easy to operate. Windows XP, MS Office 2000 and Firefox are a great combination and Its hard to get excited about paid upgrades from this point. I bet my kids will be the first to get Vista because some game they want to play will require it.
|
|
|
Post by JayUtah on Feb 6, 2007 13:23:24 GMT -4
In practice I use whatever combination of hardware gets the job done. That's usually a combination of Windows (gaming, messaging, office productivity), Mac OS X (audio/video production, graphic arts), and Linux (programming, high-performance computing, servers).
Windows 3.1 works well in a non-networked embedded role. It is reasonably stable and reasonably bug-free. The later Windowses suffer from a large list of hasty design decisions, legacy compatibility, and an improper emphasis on new features rather than ongoing stability. Windows cannot be made secure against viruses because its protection model is broken at the most fundamental levels. Microsoft's decision to support flashy features and special interests (e.g., digital rights management) at a low level compromises their ability to deliver a robust product.
|
|
|
Post by hplasm on Feb 6, 2007 15:46:41 GMT -4
Apparently one of Kepler's long-lost laws of orbits is that computing power needs increase proportional to orbital altitude. Hmmm... I wonder what software the Moon uses to stay in its orbit? Lunix/Munix.... /gets coat...
|
|
|
Post by LunarOrbit on Feb 7, 2007 0:21:30 GMT -4
Well, someone has too much time on his hands ... Yes... it's true.
|
|
|
Post by Obviousman on Feb 7, 2007 2:16:36 GMT -4
I hate Windows as much as the next guy, and especially Microsoft's methods of maintaining and extending it. But I was surprised to learn that Windows 3.1 (remember that?) is still alive and kicking and actually being used in human-rated control systems. Hehehe. Reminds me of a tale. About two weeks ago, we held our Pay Night Raffles. We use a commercially build random number generator to determine ticket numbers, etc. After I had set it all up, I proceeded to draw the tickets. The first number was the last number entered. Unusual, but not impossible. We then hit the button again and... the same number appeared. Seemed that the "draw" button was inoperative. As a backup, we pulled out an old laptop that had a random number generator using Excel on it. To my surprise, the OS was Win 3.1! Luckily, I was familiar with it and got the draw happening. What surprised me more (or perhaps not really) was that so many people had no idea about how to use the GUI (or lack of it) on 3.1! Many people who are "computer literate" would be stumped by DOS!
|
|
|
Post by shoop29 on Feb 7, 2007 13:41:47 GMT -4
Many people who are "computer literate" would be stumped by DOS! I wonder what they'd think of having to use cards nowadays... K I just dated myself but hey can't all be young whelps lol
|
|
|
Post by gwen on Feb 7, 2007 14:13:19 GMT -4
I hate Windows as much as the next guy, and especially Microsoft's methods of maintaining and extending it. But I was surprised to learn that Windows 3.1 (remember that?) is still alive and kicking and actually being used in human-rated control systems. Because of my work I got to know FreeBSD, which I now have at home too. Never crashes! I was reading about Vista the other day and thinking, ok I have that... I have that... yep, got that too... never mind the baggage I don't have and wouldn't want!
|
|
|
Post by Nowhere Man on Feb 7, 2007 14:27:27 GMT -4
First thing I did with my first DOS PC was RTFM. Wanted to know how to program the thing, not just use it.
Fred
|
|
|
Post by james on Feb 7, 2007 22:07:32 GMT -4
Ah the days of DOS and Win 3.1. Good times. Mean while, Vista seems like a bloated piece of trash. My friend saw a computer running Vista on display at a store, it had really good stats and everything. But when he moved the mouse, the cpu usage shot up and the mouse courser movement was laggy... It's really pathetic.
OS X, Linux and other OS' can run fancy graphical UI's on much less with no problems. I won't even upgrade to XP, let alone Vista. Going stick with Win2k for as long as I can and probably switch to Linux in the near future.
|
|