switch to room list switch to menu My folders
Go to page: First ... 17 18 19 20 [21] 22 23 24 25 ... Last
[#] Mon Sep 20 2004 14:35:47 EDT from Chickenhead @ Uncensored

Subject: One. Lousy. Customer.

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

On a daily basis, the Itanic makes my life miserable.

We have racks and racks of x86 based machines running our software. Most
of the time it runs well. But not on Itanic, oh god no. Itanic is DIFFERENT.
Itanic is FUCKING SLOW. Itanic is a pain in the ass to debug. Windows on
Itanic is a slap-dash hack job that never should have made it out of Microsoft
in anything other than a dumpster.

So I was complaining about Itanic this morning to my boss and he let slip
how many customers we have demanding our software on Itanic: ONE.
ONE FUCKING CUSTOMER. And they don't exactly NEED it either...they just
want to make sure our stuff works on "all platforms" in case some day they
need to support fucking Itanic. All that effort, time and pain for a
"maybe kinda sorta".

Right now there is probably more need for Windows 3.1 versions of our
software than Itanic. Hell we could probably find more OS/2 Warp customers.

Die Itanic. Just fucking DIE.

[#] Tue Oct 05 2004 05:59:16 EDT from Nite*Star @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]
IBM Adds Fingerprint Sensor to ThinkPads

[#] Tue Oct 05 2004 06:19:49 EDT from Nite*Star @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

IBM offers a bi-weekly newsletter on Linux, entitled "The Linux Executive Report":

[#] Wed Oct 06 2004 19:22:09 EDT from georbit @ Haven BBS

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

There doesn't seem to be any checks on that subscription form... it appears you could sign up anybody.

[#] Thu Oct 07 2004 07:31:01 EDT from Nite*Star @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

you mean, like bill gates?

[#] Thu Oct 07 2004 10:33:26 EDT from IGnatius T Foobar @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

No, we sign up Gates for the "Mysterious Brown Powder of the Month Club"

[#] Thu Oct 07 2004 15:28:52 EDT from Ford II @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

I think you guys heard about the tpf on linux thing? somebody here mentioned it too. funny stuff.

[#] Thu Oct 07 2004 16:50:46 EDT from Peter Pulse @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Yea, but it seems a little wierd to me.. as tpf programs are written in assembler.. how useful could it be? Unless it includes an emulator or cross-assembler.
From what learned about TPF at Prodigy, there are a great number of registers and such which have specific purposes in TPF, which don't exist on other processors.
So they would have to do a lot of remapping of things...

[#] Thu Oct 07 2004 17:04:47 EDT from Ford II @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

yeah, but just think, you could buy 1000 linux shitboxes and run your tpf programs there for gazillions less than a mainframe.
Ford (IBM has obviously learned the lesson of cannibalize your business before somebody else does) ][

[#] Thu Oct 07 2004 21:54:31 EDT from IGnatius T Foobar @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

It appears that the "retooled" TPF allows programmers to talk to it in high level languages. The writeups that I read didn't seem to imply that it would be intended to port over a bunch of programs written in 370 assembler.

Although if they wanted to go nuts, they could hack together something to transcode 370 assembler to Java bytecode...

[#] Fri Oct 08 2004 05:44:10 EDT from fleeb @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Does it effectively write reports, though? It must be able to do this with a coversheet.

[#] Fri Oct 08 2004 08:13:39 EDT from Freakdog @ Dog Pound BBS II

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

I thought that was TPS.

[#] Fri Oct 08 2004 08:59:30 EDT from fleeb @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

F, S, it all sounds alike to me.

[#] Wed Oct 13 2004 16:14:32 EDT from isoroku @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]
This was the reason I was in Tucson recently.

[#] Wed Oct 13 2004 23:16:03 EDT from wizard of aahz @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]


[#] Thu Oct 14 2004 23:17:34 EDT from IGnatius T Foobar @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Good stuff.  The big one makes our 2105 look downright obsolete.  I'd be interested in learning more about how the new storage systems handle replication.

[#] Fri Oct 15 2004 07:41:29 EDT from Ragnar Danneskjold @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

I wonder if it can copy between LSS's (although I think new Shark code can do that now) and if it can easily reclaim storage.

[#] Sun Oct 17 2004 10:29:56 EDT from IGnatius T Foobar @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

The new architecture might not even *have* LSS's. I think it's time to call IBM and ask for a long-term onsite demo. :)

[#] Sun Oct 17 2004 18:12:39 EDT from Peter Pulse @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Anyone know if the hard disk caddy and/or CDROM+Floppy unit from a 390x series thinkpad will fit in a 240x series? Thanks.

[#] Sun Oct 17 2004 20:38:00 EDT from Mr.T @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

I'm pretty sure that the drive modules fro that era were standardized, but
I'm not 100% positive.

Go to page: First ... 17 18 19 20 [21] 22 23 24 25 ... Last