Re: 2007 The greatest defeat in LinTard history. - BSD

This is a discussion on Re: 2007 The greatest defeat in LinTard history. - BSD ; "Bob Eager" writes: > On Sun, 25 Nov 2007 22:36:22 UTC, John Thompson > wrote: > >> On 2007-11-25, spike1@freenet.co.uk wrote: >> >> > Unix is crap! VMS rules? >> > Can't go much further back or we'd be in ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 21 to 29 of 29

Thread: Re: 2007 The greatest defeat in LinTard history.

  1. Re: 2007 The greatest defeat in LinTard history.

    "Bob Eager" writes:

    > On Sun, 25 Nov 2007 22:36:22 UTC, John Thompson
    > wrote:
    >
    >> On 2007-11-25, spike1@freenet.co.uk wrote:
    >>
    >> > Unix is crap! VMS rules?
    >> > Can't go much further back or we'd be in "Eniac is crap! Colossus rules!"
    >> > territory.

    >
    > Inaccurate, since neither of those was an operating system. And there is
    > still a working Colossus too!


    Are you referring to the newly built one?

    >
    >>
    >> Slide rule rules. That's why they call it a slide *RULE!* Duh!

    >
    > Still got mine!


    --
    La buena hilandera en invierno acaba la tela.
    -- Refrán.

  2. Re: 2007 The greatest defeat in LinTard history.

    On Mon, 26 Nov 2007 00:13:28 +0000, AZ Nomad wrote:

    > On Sun, 25 Nov 2007 09:56:23 +0000, spike1@freenet.co.uk
    > wrote:
    >
    >
    >>In the sacred domain of comp.os.linux.misc, Bob Eager
    >> didnst hastily scribble thusly:
    >>> On Sun, 25 Nov 2007 08:41:06 UTC, spike1@freenet.co.uk wrote:

    >
    >>>> In the sacred domain of comp.os.linux.advocacy, Bob Eager
    >>>> didnst hastily scribble thusly:
    >>>> > I'm not bothered. OS wars have happened for as long as I remember
    >>>> > (and that's a long time).
    >>>>
    >>>> Commodore 64 is crap! ZX Spectrum rules! (so there)
    >>>>

    >
    >>> But they are fairly new. I'm talking much further back...!

    >
    >>Unix is crap! VMS rules?
    >>Can't go much further back or we'd be in "Eniac is crap! Colossus
    >>rules!" territory.

    >
    > What do you expect? Microsoft still hasn't embraced the early 60's
    > technology where an operating system is protected from its users.


    Or even non-users...

  3. Re: 2007 The greatest defeat in LinTard history.

    * Bob Eager fired off this tart reply:

    >> Slide rule rules. That's why they call it a slide *RULE!* Duh!

    >
    > Still got mine!


    My log-log is bigger than your log-log.

    --
    Tux rox!

  4. Re: 2007 The greatest defeat in LinTard history.

    On Sun, 25 Nov 2007 20:58:18 -0500, Linonut wrote:

    > * Bob Eager fired off this tart reply:
    >
    >>> Slide rule rules. That's why they call it a slide *RULE!* Duh!

    >>
    >> Still got mine!

    >
    > My log-log is bigger than your log-log.


    Mine's got a 21-foot scale. How big is yours?

  5. Re: 2007 The greatest defeat in LinTard history.

    * spinner fired off this tart reply:

    > On Sun, 25 Nov 2007 20:58:18 -0500, Linonut wrote:
    >
    >> * Bob Eager fired off this tart reply:
    >>
    >>>> Slide rule rules. That's why they call it a slide *RULE!* Duh!
    >>>
    >>> Still got mine!

    >>
    >> My log-log is bigger than your log-log.

    >
    > Mine's got a 21-foot scale. How big is yours?


    How many digits of precision is that!!!!!?

    Mine is circular, by the way.

    Here's a laugh. Read Heinlein's "Starman Jones". The kid has a
    circular slide rule.

    --
    Tux rox!

  6. Re: 2007 The greatest defeat in LinTard history.

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    Hash: SHA1

    On Sun, 25 Nov 2007 23:45:41 +0000,
    spike1@freenet.co.uk wrote:
    > In the sacred domain of comp.os.linux.misc,
    > Bob Eager didnst hastily scribble thusly:
    >> On Sun, 25 Nov 2007 22:36:22 UTC, John Thompson
    >> wrote:

    >
    >>> On 2007-11-25, spike1@freenet.co.uk wrote:
    >>>
    >>> > Unix is crap! VMS rules?
    >>> > Can't go much further back or we'd be in "Eniac is crap! Colossus rules!"
    >>> > territory.

    >
    >> Inaccurate, since neither of those was an operating system. And there is
    >> still a working Colossus too!

    >
    > Not quite...
    > There is NOW a working colossus, yes.
    > But not "still". It's new.
    > The last original colossus was dismantled after the war and the blueprints
    > stamped with top secret. (And everyone involved with it bound by the
    > official secrets act)
    >
    > That incredibly stupid act set the british computer industry back decades.
    >
    >>>
    >>> Slide rule rules. That's why they call it a slide *RULE!* Duh!

    >
    >> Still got mine!

    >
    > Never had one.



    I have several and use them on a fairly regular basis.

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

    iD8DBQFHSjL3d90bcYOAWPYRAoxaAJ9UEdSFGYRPfdjcy8ujz6 9g8yQrZgCeKf2p
    PhzdZ11YgJc59z6Bh286rv8=
    =QECw
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

    --
    Jim Richardson http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock
    Step by step, day by day, machine by machine, the penguins march forward.

  7. Re: 2007 The greatest defeat in LinTard history.

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    Hash: SHA1

    On Sun, 25 Nov 2007 21:26:10 -0500,
    Linonut wrote:
    > * spinner fired off this tart reply:
    >
    >> On Sun, 25 Nov 2007 20:58:18 -0500, Linonut wrote:
    >>
    >>> * Bob Eager fired off this tart reply:
    >>>
    >>>>> Slide rule rules. That's why they call it a slide *RULE!* Duh!
    >>>>
    >>>> Still got mine!
    >>>
    >>> My log-log is bigger than your log-log.

    >>
    >> Mine's got a 21-foot scale. How big is yours?

    >
    > How many digits of precision is that!!!!!?
    >
    > Mine is circular, by the way.
    >
    > Here's a laugh. Read Heinlein's "Starman Jones". The kid has a
    > circular slide rule.
    >



    So do I got it on ebay a couple years ago. Still like my std 12"
    pickets better, but the circular one is interesting.

    Although I find nomographs fascinating too. Just weird I guess. I
    created a nomograph for my Savage 308 load for boomershoot. Wind, range,
    and angle, keyed to the specfic load, a lot faster than ballistics
    calculations, and I don't need a calculator at the range. It does take
    two steps though, so I am trying to simplify it.

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

    iD8DBQFHSjQld90bcYOAWPYRAic8AJ9jre1liOmn8V43yjzlpR 2cB4pnOgCeIB1B
    XnCIumuJQYkPdRpSxIojkys=
    =WsPo
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

    --
    Jim Richardson http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock
    "$HOME is where your dotfiles are"

  8. Re: 2007 The greatest defeat in LinTard history.

    On Sun, 25 Nov 2007 21:26:10 -0500, Linonut wrote:

    > * spinner fired off this tart reply:
    >
    >> On Sun, 25 Nov 2007 20:58:18 -0500, Linonut wrote:
    >>
    >>> * Bob Eager fired off this tart reply:
    >>>
    >>>>> Slide rule rules. That's why they call it a slide *RULE!* Duh!
    >>>>
    >>>> Still got mine!
    >>>
    >>> My log-log is bigger than your log-log.

    >>
    >> Mine's got a 21-foot scale. How big is yours?

    >
    > How many digits of precision is that!!!!!?


    Five. The manual claimed six but six is iffy whereas five is repeatable.

    >
    > Mine is circular, by the way.


    Mine, too, with a spiral scale. I've forgotten the diameter but it's
    around 10".

    > Here's a laugh. Read Heinlein's "Starman Jones". The kid has a
    > circular slide rule.


    Love that futuristic technology!


    Too bad they took the sliderule out of xcalc. Does anyone know of any
    other slide rule simulators for linux?

  9. Re: 2007 The greatest defeat in LinTard history.

    ["Followup-To:" header set to comp.os.linux.misc.]
    On 2007-11-25, Bob Eager wrote:
    > On Sun, 25 Nov 2007 22:36:22 UTC, John Thompson
    > wrote:
    >
    >>
    >> Slide rule rules. That's why they call it a slide *RULE!* Duh!


    > Still got mine!


    Sure, but mine's bigger than yours:

    http://www.os2.dhs.org/~john/sliderule.jpg

    :-)

    --

    John (john@os2.dhs.org)

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2