Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Forums
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] 3   Go Down

Author Topic: True?  (Read 9199 times)

Description:

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline persia

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Sep 2006
  • Posts: 3753
    • Show only replies by persia
Re: True?
« Reply #14 on: March 03, 2011, 03:56:43 PM »
I heard Santa is delivering the X1000s personally...

Quote from: Kesa;619237
Hmmmmm... lets think about this. It's on Moobunny and nowhere else but Moobunny. Do i really need to spell it out for you? :)

Off topic. Forgive my ignorance but how could the x1000 hardware fail? In todays age of generic pc's it shouldn't be too hard to make computer hardware that works should it? What i think is the delay of the x1000 is Hyperion still trying to port AOS4.x. I wouldn't be surprised if Aeon have already assembled all the 200(?) x1000's and are just waiting for Hyperion to do their part. Blaming failed hardware seems a bit far fetched to me somehow :rolleyes:
Logged
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

What we\'re witnessing is the sad, lonely crowing of that last, doomed cock.
 

Offline LoadWB

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Jul 2006
  • Posts: 2901
  • Country: 00
    • Show only replies by LoadWB
Re: True?
« Reply #15 on: March 03, 2011, 06:13:57 PM »
Quote from: Colin_Camper;619314
Oh yeah! You're the guy that thinks that Win95 didn't run atop of DOS 7!

You proved me wrong, eh? I don't think so. The only thing proved is that you have an inflated ego and an ignorance of Microsoft OS.
Hint: MBR>>MSDOS.SYS>>IO.SYS are the first three objects touched during a Win95 boot.

My triple-boot system used lilo to boot Windows (and Linux and Solaris.)  So, given your logic, Windows runs on top of Linux.  Sorry, go browse through MSDN and Technet sometime, and also read some of Mark Russinovich's excellent articles on the architecture of Windows.  Of particular relevance to our debate are the articles pre-Windows 2000 (which, by the way, was NOT the combination of the 9x and NT kernels: that was XP.)

Being sure of one's self does not equate to inflated ego.  I am simply right.  And this has now become off-topic and I will not continue here.
Logged
 

Offline AmigaNG

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Join Date: Feb 2010
  • Posts: 320
  • Country: 00
    • Show only replies by AmigaNG
Re: True?
« Reply #16 on: March 03, 2011, 06:37:54 PM »
Forget what Tever said, I have a picture

"I think I can take him" .......................................................... "I really regret saying Summer 2010 now!"
 :)
Logged
 

Offline jorkany

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Sep 2006
  • Posts: 1009
    • Show only replies by jorkany
    • http://www.amigaos4.com
Re: True?
« Reply #17 on: March 03, 2011, 07:52:07 PM »
AmigaNG, good one!
Logged
 

Offline runequester

  • It\'s Amiga time!
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Oct 2009
  • Posts: 3695
    • Show only replies by runequester
Re: True?
« Reply #18 on: March 04, 2011, 12:36:59 AM »
Looks like typical rabble rousing.

Im curious though, the posting talks about a pre-order. Did this actually occur ?
Logged
 

Offline TensionTopic starter

Re: True?
« Reply #19 on: March 04, 2011, 11:01:30 AM »
Quote from: Colin_Camper;619240

From AW.Net - TrevorDick

"I normally refrain from posting in this type of thread, believing it does more bad than good and gives credence to the original "story". Suffice to say the A1-X1000 project is continuing as planned."


Phew...  Thank feck everything is continuing as planned.

We're still ok for the summer 2010 release then??
Logged
 

Offline Franko

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Jun 2010
  • Posts: 5707
    • Show only replies by Franko
Re: True?
« Reply #20 on: March 04, 2011, 11:04:43 AM »
Quote from: Tension;619575
Phew...  Thank feck everything is continuing as planned.

We're still ok for the summer 2010 release then??


:roflmao:

Well as I'm still stuck in 1986 I've only got another 24 years to wait then... :)
Logged
 

Offline Colin_Camper

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Join Date: Jul 2002
  • Posts: 395
    • Show only replies by Colin_Camper
Re: True?
« Reply #21 on: March 04, 2011, 12:05:04 PM »
Quote from: LoadWB;619338
So, given your logic, Windows runs on top of Linux..

You should go and learn logic.

No, it just means that instead of booting MS-DOS7 from MBR you are booting from LILO.
If you don't want a thread to go off-topic don't jump in and accuse people of being 'proved wrong' when it is you, yourself, who is wrong. :-)

Quote from: LoadWB;619338
Windows 2000(which, by the way, was NOT the combination of the 9x and NT kernels: that was XP.)

I didn't say it was. Windows 2000 was NT 5. The 9x and NT kernels were never combined. However XP was shipped with a very effective Dos/Windows9x compatibility layer.
« Last Edit: March 04, 2011, 12:13:24 PM by Colin_Camper »
Logged
Colin Camper CCNP MCSE P45 UB40
A4000D
 

Offline whabang

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Mar 2002
  • Posts: 7270
    • Show only replies by whabang
Re: True?
« Reply #22 on: March 04, 2011, 12:15:26 PM »
Quote from: Amigaworld
Error - The forum/topic you selected does not exist. Please go back and try again.
/me brings the popcorn

Also, lol @ XP using a hybrid NT/9x kernel.
Logged
Beating the dead horse since 2002.
 

Offline psxphill

Re: True?
« Reply #23 on: March 04, 2011, 02:03:02 PM »
Quote from: Colin_Camper;619592
No, it just means that instead of booting MS-DOS7 from MBR you are booting from LILO.
If you don't want a thread to go off-topic don't jump in and accuse people of being 'proved wrong' when it is you, yourself, who is wrong. :-)

Windows 95 is a bit complex. While msdos is used during bootup it's not necessarily used when the O/S runs because windows 95 tries to keep in 32bit mode as much as possible (which msdos can't run in).
 
It's generally only for backward compatibility with 16bit dos device drivers loaded through config.sys & autoexec.bat that it has to fall back. You really notice the performance difference when this happens.
Logged
 

Offline jorkany

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Sep 2006
  • Posts: 1009
    • Show only replies by jorkany
    • http://www.amigaos4.com
Re: True?
« Reply #24 on: March 04, 2011, 02:41:13 PM »
Quote from: runequester;619472
Looks like typical rabble rousing.

Im curious though, the posting talks about a pre-order. Did this actually occur ?

Yes, although A-eon refer to it as a "Beta Test". A number of people paid 750 Euro to take part, back around November. A-eon announced in January that the boards would be delivered 1st quarter 2011, but so far it seems no-one has received anything. At least one "beta tester" got fed up with waiting and had their money refunded.

You can find complete details from the beta tester information pack and agreement documents below:

Info Pack:
http://img820.imageshack.us/img820/9730/betatestletter1.png
http://img707.imageshack.us/img707/2743/betatestletter2.png

"Legal" agreement:
http://img822.imageshack.us/img822/6373/aeonbetatester1.png
http://img291.imageshack.us/img291/8508/aeonbetatester2.png
http://img839.imageshack.us/img839/5538/aeonbetatester3.png
http://img375.imageshack.us/img375/9936/aeonbetatester4.png
http://img831.imageshack.us/img831/1215/aeonbetatester5.png
http://img828.imageshack.us/img828/6300/aeonbetatester6.png
http://img710.imageshack.us/img710/6528/aeonbetatester7.png
http://img839.imageshack.us/img839/7463/aeonbetatester8.png
http://img163.imageshack.us/img163/2034/aeonbetatester9.png


(oh, and by the way for the moobunny bashers, the source of the above:
http://moobunny.dreamhosters.com/cgi/mbmessage.pl/amiga/175779.shtml )
« Last Edit: March 04, 2011, 02:44:24 PM by jorkany »
Logged
 

Offline Templario

Re: True?
« Reply #25 on: March 04, 2011, 02:51:35 PM »
Quote from: Tension;619233
http://moobunny.dreamhosters.com/cgi/mbthread.pl/amiga/expand/186755
For this "news" missing only two old women of my town behind a window, and voila the gossip seems is more gossip.
Logged
Amiga 500 with ROMs 1.3-2.05 and M-Tec AT 500 with hard disk and 4MB Ram.
WinUAE + Original OS 3.5&3.9
Sam440ep 800 MHZ + OS 4.1 F.E.
Sam460ex 1 GHz + OS 4.1 + Update 6. K.O.
MacMini 1.5 GHz + MorphOS 3.9
PowerBook G4 1.65 + MorphOS 3.9
 

Offline jorkany

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Sep 2006
  • Posts: 1009
    • Show only replies by jorkany
    • http://www.amigaos4.com
Re: True?
« Reply #26 on: March 04, 2011, 02:54:21 PM »
nm - wrong link! lol
Logged
 

Offline number6

Re: True?
« Reply #27 on: March 04, 2011, 03:03:11 PM »
Quote from: jorkany;619624
At least one "beta tester" got fed up with waiting and had their money refunded.



Who?


#6
Logged
 

Offline jorkany

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Sep 2006
  • Posts: 1009
    • Show only replies by jorkany
    • http://www.amigaos4.com
Re: True?
« Reply #28 on: March 04, 2011, 03:07:36 PM »
Quote from: number6;619628
Who?


#6


JAHC of WookieChat fame.
Logged
 

Offline number6

Re: True?
« Reply #29 from previous page: March 04, 2011, 03:11:26 PM »
Quote from: jorkany;619630
JAHC of WookieChat fame.


Link to where he said/indicated (what you posted)?

"At least one "beta tester" got fed up with waiting and had their money refunded."

#6
Logged
 
Pages: 1 [2] 3   Go Up
« previous next »